Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29116977›Full record

ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2018

The Evolving Purposes of Medical Revalidation in the United Kingdom: A Qualitative Study of Professional and Regulatory Narratives.

Abigail Tazzyman, Jane Ferguson, Kieran Walshe, Alan Boyd, John Tredinnick-Rowe, Charlotte Hillier, Samantha Regan De Bere, Julian Archer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Abigail TazzymanA. Tazzyman is research associate, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. J. Ferguson is research associate, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. K. Walshe is professor of health policy and management, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. A. Boyd is research fellow, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. J. Tredinnick-Rowe is research assistant, Plymouth University, Plymouth, England. C. Hillier was research associate, Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, England. S. Regan De Bere is lecturer, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, England. J. Archer is senior clinical lecturer and director, Collaboration for the Advancement in Medical Education Research and Assessment, Plymouth University, Plymouth, England.
Jane Ferguson
Kieran Walshe
Alan Boyd
John Tredinnick-Rowe
Charlotte Hillier
Samantha Regan De Bere
Julian Archer

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2011-04-004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious research found professionalism and regulation to be competing discourses when plans for medical revalidation in the United Kingdom were being developed in 2011. The purpose of this study was to explore how these competing discourses developed and how the perceived purposes of revalidation evolved as the policy was implemented.

methodSeventy-one interviews with 60 UK policy makers and senior health care leaders were conducted during the development and implementation of revalidation: 31 in 2011, 26 in 2013, and 14 in 2015. Interviewees were selected using purposeful sampling. Across all interviews, questions focused around three areas: individual roles in relation to revalidation; interviewees' understanding of revalidation, its purpose, and aims; and predictions or experiences of revalidation's impact. The first two interview sets also included questions about measurement and evaluation of revalidation. Data were analyzed using the constant comparative method to understand changes and continuities.

resultsTwo main discourses regarding the purpose of revalidation were present across the implementation period: professionalism and regulation. The nature of the relationship between these two purposes and how they were described changed over time, with the separate discourses converging, and early concerns about actual or potential conflict being replaced by perceptions of coexistence or codependency.

conclusionsThe changing nature of the discourse about revalidation suggests that early concerns about adverse consequences were not borne out as organizations and professionals engaged with implementation and experienced the realities of revalidation in practice. Reconciling professional and regulatory narratives was arguably necessary to the effective implementation of revalidation.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceLicensure, MedicalGovernment RegulationHumansInterviews as TopicPhysiciansProfessionalismQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID29116977
PMCPMC5895134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.