Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36703159›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Examiner perceptions of the MRCGP recorded consultation assessment for general practice licensing during COVID-19: cross-sectional study.

Vanessa Botan, Despina Laparidou, Viet-Hai Phung, Peter Cheung, Adrian Freeman, Richard Wakeford, Meiling Denney, Graham R Law, Aloysius Niroshan Siriwardena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Vanessa BotanCommunity and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN5 7AT, England.
Despina LaparidouCommunity and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN5 7AT, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5427-7422
Viet-Hai PhungCommunity and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN5 7AT, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5827-590X
Peter CheungRoyal College of General Practitioners, 30 Euston Square, London, NW1 2FB, UK.
Adrian FreemanUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, EX1 2HZ, England.
Richard WakefordHughes Hall, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB1 2EW, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9647-5857
Meiling DenneyRoyal College of General Practitioners, 30 Euston Square, London, NW1 2FB, UK.
Graham R LawCommunity and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN5 7AT, England.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7904-0264
Aloysius Niroshan SiriwardenaCommunity and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN5 7AT, England. nsiriwardena@lincoln.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2484-8201

Funding

Royal College of General Practitioners not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA) was developed rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic to replace the Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) for UK general practice licensing. Our aim was to evaluate examiner perceptions of the RCA.

methodsWe employed a cross-sectional design using a questionnaire survey of RCA examiners with attitudinal (relating to examiners thoughts and perceptions of the RCA) and free text response options. We conducted statistical descriptive and factor analysis of quantitative data with qualitative thematic analysis of free text responses.

resultsOverall, 182 of 260 (70%) examiners completed the questionnaire. Responders felt that consultations submitted were representative of the work of a typical GP during the pandemic and provided a good sample across the curriculum. They were also generally positive about the logistic, advisory and other support provided as well as the digital platform. Despite responders generally agreeing there was sufficient information available in video or audio consultations to judge candidates' data gathering, clinical management, and interpersonal skills, they were less confident about their ability to make judgments of candidates' performance compared with the CSA. The qualitative analysis of free text responses detailed the problems of case selection and content, explained examiners' difficulties when making judgments, and detailed the generally positive views about support, training and information technology. Responders also provided helpful recommendations for improving the assessment.

conclusionThe RCA was considered by examiners to be feasible and broadly acceptable, although they experienced challenges from candidate case selection, case content and judgments leading to suggested areas for improvement.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticeClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, GraduateHumansPandemicsReferral and ConsultationAssessmentCOVID-19Education, medical, postgraduateGeneral practiceLicensing

Identifiers

PMID36703159
PMCPMC9879559

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.