Dataset Information

The Academic Backbone: longitudinal continuities in educational achievement from secondary school and medical school to MRCP(UK) and the specialist register in UK medical students and doctors.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Selection of medical students in the UK is still largely based on prior academic achievement, although doubts have been expressed as to whether performance in earlier life is predictive of outcomes later in medical school or post-graduate education. This study analyses data from five longitudinal studies of UK medical students and doctors from the early 1970s until the early 2000s. Two of the studies used the AH5, a group test of general intelligence (that is, intellectual aptitude). Sex and ethnic differences were also analyzed in light of the changing demographics of medical students over the past decades.

Methods

Data from five cohort studies were available: the Westminster Study (began clinical studies from 1975 to 1982), the 1980, 1985, and 1990 cohort studies (entered medical school in 1981, 1986, and 1991), and the University College London Medical School (UCLMS) Cohort Study (entered clinical studies in 2005 and 2006). Different studies had different outcome measures, but most had performance on basic medical sciences and clinical examinations at medical school, performance in Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (MRCP(UK)) examinations, and being on the General Medical Council Specialist Register.

Results

Correlation matrices and path analyses are presented. There were robust correlations across different years at medical school, and medical school performance also predicted MRCP(UK) performance and being on the GMC Specialist Register. A-levels correlated somewhat less with undergraduate and post-graduate performance, but there was restriction of range in entrants. General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE)/O-level results also predicted undergraduate and post-graduate outcomes, but less so than did A-level results, but there may be incremental validity for clinical and post-graduate performance. The AH5 had some significant correlations with outcome, but they were inconsistent. Sex and ethnicity also had predictive effects on measures of educational attainment, undergraduate, and post-graduate performance. Women performed better in assessments but were less likely to be on the Specialist Register. Non-white participants generally underperformed in undergraduate and post-graduate assessments, but were equally likely to be on the Specialist Register. There was a suggestion of smaller ethnicity effects in earlier studies.

Conclusions

The existence of the Academic Backbone concept is strongly supported, with attainment at secondary school predicting performance in undergraduate and post-graduate medical assessments, and the effects spanning many years. The Academic Backbone is conceptualized in terms of the development of more sophisticated underlying structures of knowledge ('cognitive capital' and 'medical capital'). The Academic Backbone provides strong support for using measures of educational attainment, particularly A-levels, in student selection.

SUBMITTER: McManus IC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3827330 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Academic Backbone: longitudinal continuities in educational achievement from secondary school and medical school to MRCP(UK) and the specialist register in UK medical students and doctors.

McManus I C IC Woolf Katherine K Dacre Jane J Paice Elisabeth E Dewberry Chris C

BMC medicine 20131114

<h4>Background</h4>Selection of medical students in the UK is still largely based on prior academic achievement, although doubts have been expressed as to whether performance in earlier life is predictive of outcomes later in medical school or post-graduate education. This study analyses data from five longitudinal studies of UK medical students and doctors from the early 1970s until the early 2000s. Two of the studies used the AH5, a group test of general intelligence (that is, intellectual apt ...[more]

PMID: 24229333

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeurophobia is the fear of neurosciences held by medical students and doctors. The present study aims to identify whether Neurology is considered a difficult subject by medical students and non-specialist doctors from Sri Lanka and evaluate reasons for such perceived difficulties.MethodsThe study was conducted from May-June 2008. One hundred non-specialist doctors from the Colombo South Teaching Hospital and 150 medical students from the University of Sri Jayewardenepura were invited for the study. Data were collected by a pre-tested expert-validated self-administered questionnaire, designed to assess the degree of perceived difficulty, confidence, interest and knowledge of Neurology as compared to other subjects. It also evaluated reasons and probable strategies to overcome the perceived difficulties and/or lack of interests.ResultsAll non-specialist doctors and 148 medical students responded to the questionnaire (response rate-99.2%). The most favourite subject among medical students and non-specialist doctors were Cardiology and Endocrinology respectively, while Neurology was ranked third. In all participants the current level of interest was most for Cardiology (3.52±1.36), while Neurology was the least interesting specialty for majority of medical students (18.5%) and non-specialist doctors (25.0%). The current level of knowledge among medical students was most for Cardiology (3.12±0.86), while Neurology (2.53±0.96) was ranked fifth. The most difficult specialty for majority of medical students (50.0%) and non-specialist doctors (41.7%) was Neurology. All the participants were least confident when dealing with patients with headache (2.20±0.81), numbness of feet (2.07±0.79) and dizziness (2.07±0.78) when compared to dealing with other non-neurological complaints. The commonest reasons 'why Neurology was felt to be a difficult subject' were; the need to know basic neuro-anatomy and having a complex clinical examination. Participants' felt that clinical/hospital based teaching (3.49±0.65), case discussions (3.45±0.68) and teaching aids (3.10±0.89) would be the most important teaching strategies to improve their competency in Neurology.ConclusionNeurology is considered a difficult subject by undergraduates and non-specialist doctors of Sri Lanka. The main reason for the perceived difficulty was the lack of understanding of basic sciences and deficiencies in clinical teaching. This lack of confidence could have a significant impact on patient care.

Project description:BackgroundThe UK General Medical Council has emphasized the lack of evidence on whether graduates from different UK medical schools perform differently in their clinical careers. Here we assess the performance of UK graduates who have taken MRCP(UK) Part 1 and Part 2, which are multiple-choice assessments, and PACES, an assessment using real and simulated patients of clinical examination skills and communication skills, and we explore the reasons for the differences between medical schools.MethodWe perform a retrospective analysis of the performance of 5827 doctors graduating in UK medical schools taking the Part 1, Part 2 or PACES for the first time between 2003/2 and 2005/3, and 22453 candidates taking Part 1 from 1989/1 to 2005/3.ResultsGraduates of UK medical schools performed differently in the MRCP(UK) examination between 2003/2 and 2005/3. Part 1 and 2 performance of Oxford, Cambridge and Newcastle-upon-Tyne graduates was significantly better than average, and the performance of Liverpool, Dundee, Belfast and Aberdeen graduates was significantly worse than average. In the PACES (clinical) examination, Oxford graduates performed significantly above average, and Dundee, Liverpool and London graduates significantly below average. About 60% of medical school variance was explained by differences in pre-admission qualifications, although the remaining variance was still significant, with graduates from Leicester, Oxford, Birmingham, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and London overperforming at Part 1, and graduates from Southampton, Dundee, Aberdeen, Liverpool and Belfast underperforming relative to pre-admission qualifications. The ranking of schools at Part 1 in 2003/2 to 2005/3 correlated 0.723, 0.654, 0.618 and 0.493 with performance in 1999-2001, 1996-1998, 1993-1995 and 1989-1992, respectively.ConclusionCandidates from different UK medical schools perform differently in all three parts of the MRCP(UK) examination, with the ordering consistent across the parts of the exam and with the differences in Part 1 performance being consistent from 1989 to 2005. Although pre-admission qualifications explained some of the medical school variance, the remaining differences do not seem to result from career preference or other selection biases, and are presumed to result from unmeasured differences in ability at entry to the medical school or to differences between medical schools in teaching focus, content and approaches. Exploration of causal mechanisms would be enhanced by results from a national medical qualifying examination.

Project description:BackgroundFailure rates in postgraduate examinations are often high and many candidates therefore retake examinations on several or even many times. Little, however, is known about how candidates perform across those multiple attempts. A key theoretical question to be resolved is whether candidates pass at a resit because they have got better, having acquired more knowledge or skills, or whether they have got lucky, chance helping them to get over the pass mark. In the UK, the issue of resits has become of particular interest since the General Medical Council issued a consultation and is considering limiting the number of attempts candidates may make at examinations.MethodsSince 1999 the examination for Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom (MRCP(UK)) has imposed no limit on the number of attempts candidates can make at its Part 1, Part 2 or PACES (Clinical) examination. The present study examined the performance of candidates on the examinations from 2002/2003 to 2010, during which time the examination structure has been stable. Data were available for 70,856 attempts at Part 1 by 39,335 candidates, 37,654 attempts at Part 2 by 23,637 candidates and 40,303 attempts at PACES by 21,270 candidates, with the maximum number of attempts being 26, 21 and 14, respectively. The results were analyzed using multilevel modelling, fitting negative exponential growth curves to individual candidate performance.ResultsThe number of candidates taking the assessment falls exponentially at each attempt. Performance improves across attempts, with evidence in the Part 1 examination that candidates are still improving up to the tenth attempt, with a similar improvement up to the fourth attempt in Part 2 and the sixth attempt at PACES. Random effects modelling shows that candidates begin at a starting level, with performance increasing by a smaller amount at each attempt, with evidence of a maximum, asymptotic level for candidates, and candidates showing variation in starting level, rate of improvement and maximum level. Modelling longitudinal performance across the three diets (sittings) shows that the starting level at Part 1 predicts starting level at both Part 2 and PACES, and the rate of improvement at Part 1 also predicts the starting level at Part 2 and PACES.ConclusionCandidates continue to show evidence of true improvement in performance up to at least the tenth attempt at MRCP(UK) Part 1, although there are individual differences in the starting level, the rate of improvement and the maximum level that can be achieved. Such findings provide little support for arguments that candidates should only be allowed a fixed number of attempts at an examination. However, unlimited numbers of attempts are also difficult to justify because of the inevitable and ever increasing role that luck must play with increasing numbers of resits, so that the issue of multiple attempts might be better addressed by tackling the difficult question of how a pass mark should increase with each attempt at an exam.

Dataset Information

The Academic Backbone: longitudinal continuities in educational achievement from secondary school and medical school to MRCP(UK) and the specialist register in UK medical students and doctors.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Academic Backbone: longitudinal continuities in educational achievement from secondary school and medical school to MRCP(UK) and the specialist register in UK medical students and doctors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets