ArticleBMC medical education2015
Cross-comparison of MRCGP & MRCP(UK) in a database linkage study of 2,284 candidates taking both examinations: assessment of validity and differential performance by ethnicity.
Article in BMC medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Differential attainment within medical education: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic review of specialist selection methods with implications for diversity in the medical workforce.BMC medical education · 2021Pooled it
- How do mature non-graduate students compare to the rest of the cohort in medical training? A UKMED study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- How cultural factors affect medical students' interactions with clinical practice feedback: a qualitative study of ethnically diverse students at three transcontinental campuses.Medical education online · 2025Article
- Differential attainment in UK postgraduate medical examinations: examining the relationship between sociodemographic differences and examination performance.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Big data analysis: examination of the relationship between candidates' sociodemographic characteristics and performance in the UK's Membership of the Royal College of Physicians Part 1 examination.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2025Article
- Article
- Institutional penalty: mentoring, service, perceived discrimination and its impacts on the health and academic careers of Latino faculty.Ethnic and racial studies · 2023Article
- Differential attainment at MRCS according to gender, ethnicity, age and socioeconomic factors: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Predictors of performance on the pediatric board certification examination.BMC medical education · 2021Article
- Exploring UK medical school differences: the MedDifs study of selection, teaching, student and F1 perceptions, postgraduate outcomes and fitness to practise.BMC medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- Fitness to practise sanctions in UK doctors are predicted by poor performance at MRCGP and MRCP(UK) assessments: data linkage study.BMC medicine · 2018Article
- Does the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination predict 'on-the-job' performance during UK higher specialty surgical training?Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
- Predictors of success in the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
- Passing MRCP (UK) PACES: a cross-sectional study examining the performance of doctors by sex and country.BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Impact of performance in a mandatory postgraduate surgical examination on selection into specialty training.BJS open · 2017Article
- There is a Place for Passion.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2017Article
- Does the UKCAT predict performance on exit from medical school? A national cohort study.BMJ open · 2016Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMRCGP and MRCP(UK) are the main entry qualifications for UK doctors entering general [family] practice or hospital [internal] medicine. The performance of MRCP(UK) candidates who subsequently take MRCGP allows validation of each assessment. In the UK, underperformance of ethnic minority doctors taking MRCGP has had a high political profile, with a Judicial Review in the High Court in April 2014 for alleged racial discrimination. Although the legal challenge was dismissed, substantial performance differences between white and BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) doctors undoubtedly exist. Understanding ethnic differences can be helped by comparing the performance of doctors who take both MRCGP and MRCP(UK).
methodsWe identified 2,284 candidates who had taken one or more parts of both assessments, MRCP(UK) typically being taken 3.7 years before MRCGP. We analyzed performance on knowledge-based MCQs (MRCP(UK) Parts 1 and 2 and MRCGP Applied Knowledge Test (AKT)) and clinical examinations (MRCGP Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) and MRCP(UK) Practical Assessment of Clinical Skills (PACES)).
resultsCorrelations between MRCGP and MRCP(UK) were high, disattenuated correlations for MRCGP AKT with MRCP(UK) Parts 1 and 2 being 0.748 and 0.698, and for CSA and PACES being 0.636. BME candidates performed less well on all five assessments (P < .001). Correlations disaggregated by ethnicity were complex, MRCGP AKT showing similar correlations with Part1/Part2/PACES in White and BME candidates, but CSA showing stronger correlations with Part1/Part2/PACES in BME candidates than in White candidates. CSA changed its scoring method during the study; multiple regression showed the newer CSA was better predicted by PACES than the previous CSA.
conclusionsHigh correlations between MRCGP and MRCP(UK) support the validity of each, suggesting they assess knowledge cognate to both assessments. Detailed analyses by candidate ethnicity show that although White candidates out-perform BME candidates, the differences are largely mirrored across the two examinations. Whilst the reason for the differential performance is unclear, the similarity of the effects in independent knowledge and clinical examinations suggests the differences are unlikely to result from specific features of either assessment and most likely represent true differences in ability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.