Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34301245›Full record

ArticleHuman resources for health2021

Variations in regulations to control standards for training and licensing of physicians: a multi-country comparison.

Wafa Aftab, Mishal Khan, Sonia Rego, Nishant Chavan, Afifah Rahman-Shepherd, Isha Sharma, Shishi Wu, Zahra Zeinali, Rumina Hasan, Sameen Siddiqi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human resources for health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Can a doctor be too old to practice medicine?Frontiers in health services · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors.

Wafa Aftab *Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Mishal Khan *Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan. mishal.khan@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8967-1761
Sonia RegoLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
Nishant ChavanIndependent Consultant, Mumbai, India.
Afifah Rahman-ShepherdLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
Isha SharmaIndependent Consultant, Delhi, India.
Shishi WuNational University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Zahra ZeinaliIndependent Consultant, Tehran, Iran.
Rumina HasanAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Sameen SiddiqiAga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/T02349X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo strengthen health systems, the shortage of physicians globally needs to be addressed. However, efforts to increase the numbers of physicians must be balanced with controls on medical education imparted and the professionalism of doctors licensed to practise medicine.

methodsWe conducted a multi-country comparison of mandatory regulations and voluntary guidelines to control standards for medical education, clinical training, licensing and re-licensing of doctors. We purposively selected seven case-study countries with differing health systems and income levels: Canada, China, India, Iran, Pakistan, UK and USA. Using an analytical framework to assess regulations at four sequential stages of the medical education to relicensing pathway, we extracted information from: systematically collected scientific and grey literature and online news articles, websites of regulatory bodies in study countries, and standardised input from researchers and medical professionals familiar with rules in the study countries.

resultsThe strictest controls we identified to reduce variations in medical training, licensing and re-licensing of doctors between different medical colleges, and across different regions within a country, include: medical education delivery restricted to public sector institutions; uniform, national examinations for medical college admission and licensing; and standardised national requirements for relicensing linked to demonstration of competence. However, countries analysed used different combinations of controls, balancing the strictness of controls across the four stages.

conclusionsWhile there is no gold standard model for medical education and practise regulation, examining the combinations of controls used in different countries enables identification of innovations and regulatory approaches to address specific contextual challenges, such as decentralisation of regulations to sub-national bodies or privatisation of medical education. Looking at the full continuum from medical education to licensing is valuable to understand how countries balance the strictness of controls at different stages. Further research is needed to understand how regulating authorities, policy-makers and medical associations can find the right balance of standardisation and context-based flexibility to produce well-rounded physicians.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalMedicinePhysiciansClinical CompetenceHumansIndiaGovernanceHuman resourcesMedical training

Identifiers

PMID34301245
PMCPMC8299694

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.