Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41535094›Full record

ArticleThe Medical journal of Australia2026

Health Impairment Notifications About Doctors to the Australian Medical Regulator, 2012-2022: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Marie M Bismark, Dilanka Hettiarachchi, Martin Fletcher, Owen Bradfield, Anu Tayal, Yamna Taouk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Medical journal of Australia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Marie M BismarkCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Dilanka HettiarachchiCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Martin FletcherRMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Owen BradfieldCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Anu TayalCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Yamna TaoukCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 34003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the prevalence, characteristics and outcomes of health impairment notifications to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) and to assess the influence of doctor age, sex, specialty, practice location and country of training on the incidence of health impairment notifications. STUDY

designRetrospective cohort study; analysis of linked de-identified Ahpra medical register and health impairment notifications data. SETTING,

participantsAll doctors registered to practise in Australia (except New South Wales) for whom notifications of concerns about physical or mental illness, cognitive decline, substance use disorder or other impairment to safely practising medicine were received by Ahpra during 1 July 2012-30 June 2022.

main outcome measuresHealth impairment notifications, overall and by notification type and specialty; influence of doctors' characteristics on the incidence of notifications.

resultsDuring 2012-2022, 112,677 doctors were registered to practise in Australia (other than New South Wales). A total of 1732 health impairment notifications were recorded, including at least one notification for 1258 doctors (1.1%). In multivariable analyses, the incidence of health impairment notifications was higher for male than female doctors (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-1.67), for doctors aged 70 years or older than for those aged 30-39 years (aIRR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.30-3.70) and for doctors in regional (aIRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58), rural (aIRR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.03-1.57) and remote areas (aIRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.33) than in metropolitan areas. Among doctors with specialist qualifications, the incidence of notifications was higher for psychiatrists than internal medicine physicians (aIRR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.62-3.21) and the incidence of substance use notifications was highest for anaesthetists (vs. internal medicine physicians: aIRR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.66-4.83). Compared with doctors who trained in Australia, doctors who trained in non-comparable jurisdictions were less likely to be subjects of health impairment notifications (aIRR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43-0.64). Of 1708 notifications with final Ahpra determinations, 367 (21.5%) resulted in practice restrictions or removal from practice.

conclusionsHealth impairment notifications are infrequent but can have serious consequences for doctors. The incidence of health impairment notifications is influenced by doctor age, sex, specialty and location. Specific measures that take these factors into account could support workplace health and safety for doctors and protect patients from harm.

Indexed as

Physician ImpairmentPhysiciansAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective Studiesdoctor's healthimpairmentpatient safety

Identifiers

PMID41535094
PMCPMC12803957

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.