Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29625566›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2018

Passing MRCP (UK) PACES: a cross-sectional study examining the performance of doctors by sex and country.

Emily Unwin, Henry W W Potts, Jane Dacre, Andrew Elder, Katherine Woolf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Sex differences in fitness to practise test scores: a cohort study of GPs.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Emily UnwinResearch Department of Medical Education, University College London Medical School, Royal Free Hospital, GF 664, Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK.
Henry W W PottsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, 222 Euston Road, London, NW1 2DA, UK.
Jane DacreResearch Department of Medical Education, University College London Medical School, Royal Free Hospital, GF 664, Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK.
Andrew ElderRoyal College of Physicians, 11 St Andrews Place, London, NW1 4LE, UK.
Katherine WoolfResearch Department of Medical Education, University College London Medical School, Royal Free Hospital, GF 664, Rowland Hill Street, London, NW3 2PF, UK. k.woolf@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4915-0715

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2017-10-008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is much discussion about the sex differences that exist in medical education. Research from the United Kingdom (UK) and United States has found female doctors earn less, and are less likely to be senior authors on academic papers, but female doctors are also less likely to be sanctioned, and have been found to perform better academically and clinically. It is also known that international medical graduates tend to perform more poorly academically compared to home-trained graduates in the UK, US, and Canada. It is uncertain whether the magnitude and direction of sex differences in doctors' performance is variable by country. We explored the association between doctors' sex and their performance at a large international high-stakes clinical examination: the Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (UK) Practical Assessment of Clinical Examination Skills (PACES). We examined how sex differences varied by the country in which the doctor received their primary medical qualification, the country in which they took the PACES examination, and by the country in which they are registered to practise.

methodsSeven thousand six hundred seventy-one doctors attempted PACES between October 2010 and May 2013. We analysed sex differences in first time pass rates, controlling for ethnicity, in three groups: (i) UK medical graduates (N = 3574); (ii) non-UK medical graduates registered with the UK medical regulator, the General Medical Council (GMC), and thus likely to be working in the UK (N = 1067); and (iii) non-UK medical graduates without GMC registration and so legally unable to work or train in the UK (N = 2179).

resultsFemale doctors were statistically significantly more likely to pass at their first attempt in all three groups, with the greatest sex effect seen in non-UK medical graduates without GMC registration (OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.65-2.39; P < 0.0001) and the smallest in the UK graduates (OR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.03-1.35; P = 0.02).

conclusionsAs found in a previous format of this examination and in other clinical examinations, female doctors outperformed male doctors. Further work is required to explore why sex differences were greater in non-UK graduates, especially those without GMC registration, and to consider how examination performance may relate to performance in practice.

Indexed as

Sex FactorsClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesEducational MeasurementFemaleForeign Medical GraduatesHumansMaleUnited KingdomClinical assessmentExamination performanceInternational medical graduatesMRCPPACESSex difference

Identifiers

PMID29625566
PMCPMC5889582

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.