|
GMC confidentiality rules
|
To protect the confidentiality of doctors, we do not report on any group smaller than three people.
|
|
HESA data
|
The report includes information derived from that collected by the Higher Education Statistics Agency Limited (HESA) and provided to the GMC (HESA Data). Source: HESA Student Record 2002/2003 to present. Copyright Higher Education Statistics Agency Limited. HESA makes no warranty as to the accuracy of the HESA Data. They cannot accept responsibility for any inferences or conclusions derived by third parties from data, or other information supplied by it.
|
|
HESA confidentiality rules
|
Where we have used HESA data, we have agreed different confidentiality rules. Here we do not report on any group smaller than 23 people.
And all reported group sizes are rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5. For example, a report including information about 28 people will be reported as including 30 people.
The year a student commenced medical school is taken from data provided by HESA. The HESA confidentiality rules will apply when the 'Year(s) commenced medical school' filter is used.
|
|
Confidence intervals
|
All our confidence intervals (CI) are calculated to the 95% confidence level using the recommended method for proportions from Altman, D.G., Machin, D. et al. Statistics with Confidence 2nd edition; BMJ Books. 2000.
|
|
Benchmark groups
|
Benchmark groups are allocated by programme specialty.
The benchmark group table.
|
|
Outliers
|
Outliers in these reports are where the upper confidence limit of the report group is less than the lower confidence limit of the benchmark group (below outlier: coloured purple), or where the lower confidence limit of the report group is more than the upper confidence limit of the benchmark group (above outlier: coloured dark blue).
|
|
ARCP outcome
|
Every ARCP is awarded a code denoting the outcome (satisfactory or unsatisfactory) and a description that explains the outcome.
The ARCP outcome reference table.
|
|
ARCP outcome type
|
For these reports, ARCP outcomes are grouped together in types as shown in the list below.
- Unsatisfactory outcome - Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 7.2, 7.3, RITA D or E.
- Unsatisfactory outcome excluding exam failures - Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 7.2, 7.3, RITA D or E, excluding those associated with exam failure.
- Unsatisfactory outcomes excluding incomplete evidence - Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 7.2, 7.3, RITA D or E, excluding outcomes 5 and 7.4 from calculations.
- Incomplete evidence provided - Outcomes 5 and 7.4.
- Extra time required - Outcomes ARCP 3, 7.3 and RITA E.
- Targeted training - Outcomes 2, 7.2 and RITA D. Note that these are not applicable to foundation trainees, so selecting this report type will not yield any results for foundation schools.
- Released from training - Note that there is no equivalent RITA outcome.
- COVID outcomes - Outcomes 10.1 and 10.2 have been reported separately, along with their specific C codes.
|
|
U-codes
|
U-codes are allocated to denote the reason for an unsatisfactory ARCP outcome.
The U-code reference table.
|
|
N-codes
|
N codes are allocated to denote the reason where no ARCP is awarded during the year.
The N-code reference table.
|
|
C-codes
|
C codes are allocated to record the ARCPs where COVID-19 has affected training progression.
The C-code reference table.
|
|
Medical School names
|
We have used the best available medical school value held in our systems. We have done this because PMQ awarding body is not always the same as medical school. For example, University of London as a PMQ can refer to one of several London medical schools.
We use HESA data for cases attending UK medical schools from 2002 onwards to identify specific schools where this is not the same value as the PMQ awarding body.
|
|
First and last institution
|
There are some instances where a student’s first medical school is not the same as their graduating school. Using first and last institution allows us to report on these cohorts. For example:
- Students starting at St Andrews and moving to Manchester for their clinical years
- Students starting at Durham and moving to Newcastle for their clinical training
- Students from Oxbridge who complete their PMQ at a London medical school.
|
|
Educational Performance Measure (EPM)
|
Students in the graduating cohort are ranked on their medical school performance. Schools were free to decide which assessments to include, provided they met the following criteria:
- Summative (and hence subject to formal controls);
- Cover clinical knowledge, skills and performance;
- Cover non-clinical performance;
- Cover all aspects of the curriculum assessed up to the end of the penultimate year at medical school;
- Represent the average performance of the applicants over time, rather than being limited to a snap-shot;
- Include written and practical forms of assessment.
Schools were required to consult with students and publish on their website which assessments they included in the score.
In 2012 students were placed into quartiles; from 2013 students are placed into decile.
To merge the 2012 EPM measure with the EPM scores obtained from 2013 onwards we placed cases into the top or bottom half of the EPM scale.
|
|
Course Type
|
The course types were derived by mapping the HESA values of COURSEID and COURSETITLE to course types described in the Medical School Council’s Entry requirements for UK medical schools.
These mapping were confirmed by the schools as part of an exercise conducted by the part of an exercise conducted by the MSC Selection Alliance Data Group.
|