ArticleAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2025
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.
Article in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Investigating inequality in Advanced Life Support courses: a retrospective, single-centre, survey-based pilot study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Big datasets and data analytics enable granular analyses examining group differences in performance. Our focus is on differential attainment (DA) in postgraduate College (Board) examinations. We asked: Are candidates' sociodemographic characteristics associated with performance on the UK's Membership of the Royal College of Physicians (MRCP) Part 1 after adjusting for medical school performance (MSP) and type of medical programme? This was a retrospective longitudinal cohort study of 6040 medical graduates with linked sociodemographic data in the UK Medical Education Database qualifying from a UK medical school (2012-2014) and sitting MRCP Part 1 before October 2019. Chi-squared tests established univariable associations with MRCP performance (pass/fail first sitting MRCP Part 1). Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression identified independent explanatory factors of success, adjusted for medical school. The odds (95% CI) of passing MRCP Part 1 exams on first sitting were greater for men (OR = 1.61, CI 1.42-1.81, p < 0.001) and those on a graduate entry programme (OR = 1.44, 1.05-1.99, p < 0.001). The odds of passing were lower as age increases (OR = 0.87, 0.85-0.90, p < 0.001), for minority ethnic (OR = 0.61, CI 0.53-0.7, p < 0.001), and gateway to medicine (OR = 0.49, CI 0.27-0.90, p = 0.02) candidates. After adjusting for MSP, odds were greater for passing in men (OR = 1.62, CI 1.24-2.11, p < 0.001) and candidates with higher MSP (OR = 4.12, CI 3.40-4.96, p < 0.001). Our findings illustrate how performance on MRCP part 1 is associated with group-level social and educational factors. This DA may be due to aspects of the assessment itself, and/or the persistent nature of social and educational disadvantage.
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.