210 likes | 361 Views
Analysis of Severn 2010/11 MRCGP results by SoPC Patch. Why this analysis?. It would be simple to produce percentage MRCGP pass-rates by Deanery and, for us, by Severn Patch. However but those raw data would be as meaningless as raw hospital mortality data. Why this analysis?.
E N D
Why this analysis? • It would be simple to produce percentage MRCGP pass-rates by Deanery and, for us, by Severn Patch. • However but those raw data would be as meaningless as raw hospital mortality data.
Why this analysis? • Where an ST qualified (UK, EU or IMG) affects the likelihood of succeeding in the MRCGP. • Initial GPVTS selection scores affect the likelihood of exam success.
Why this analysis? • Where an ST qualified (UK, EU or IMG) affects the likelihood of succeeding in the MRCGP. • Initial GPVTS selection scores affect the likelihood of exam success. • Women tend to do better than men.
Why this analysis? • So, when comparing patch (or Deanery) MRCGP scores and pass rates, we need to place them in the context of • place of training, • gender and • selection score.
The data • These data are for all Severn GP STs who took the AKT and/or the CSA for the first time in 2010/11. • Patch MRCGP fail rates were too small for meaningful pass/fail comparisons.
The data • The data aren't normally distributed:
But… • We know that whether candidates are from the UK, EU or IMG affects likelihood of passing, as does their gender, particularly for the CSA. • If a patch has more female, UK-trained candidates, we'd expect their MRCGP success rates to be greater.
Comparison by place of medical training • Swindon clearly had the most culturally diverse GP STs in this cohort:
Comparison by gender • And Somerset and Swindon were allocated less women than the other patches:
Comparison by selection mark • One might expect that ST1s with a better initial selection score would have a higher chance of getting a good MRCGP grade subsequently.
Comparison by selection mark • This is true to some extent to the AKT, where we find a reasonable correlation (r = 0.42) in Severn:
Comparison by selection mark • It also applies to the CSA, where Severn has a higher correlation (r = 0.52):
Comparison by selection mark • But isn't the selection mark a proxy for original medical school location and gender? • Initial GPVTS selection scores themselves relate to country of medical school and gender. • Taking those factors out, does the selection score from 3 years ago still act as a predictor of MRCGP marks?
Comparison by selection mark • Charting the GPVTS selection scores of female, UK-trained Severn GP STs against their CSA score still shows some correlation (r = 0.31):
Comparison by selection mark • So, we do need to take higher selection scores into account when comparing patches.
How can we interpret these comparisons? • Bristol's GP STs started with better GPVTS selection scores and more favourable ethnicity and gender figures. • Taking these into account, their MRCGP marks were slightly lower than expected. • Possibly linked with the poorer feedback that the Bristol SP STs give on their hospital posts in our End-of-Post Survey.
How can we interpret these comparisons? • Swindon GP STs gained slightly lower MRCGP marks. • This can be predicted & explained by, their background, gender balance and GPVTS selection scores. • Given this triple-whammy, Swindon has done well.
Discussion points • Congratulations! • What can the other patches learn from you? • How can you do even better? • in hospital? • in General Practice?