AIMS: Cognitive factors (eg, academic achievement) have had a significant role in selecting postgraduate surgical trainees in the past. This project sought to determine the role of a national undergraduate ophthalmology prize examination (Duke-Elder examination) in the selection of postgraduate ophthalmology trainees. This would also serve as a quality assurance exercise for the assessment, in which the ultimate aim is to encourage trainees into ophthalmology. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the top 20 ranked candidates in the Duke-Elder examination from 1989 to 2005 (except 1995) was carried out to determine which of them subsequently entered the ophthalmic training and General Medical Council Specialist Registers. RESULTS: Out of the top 20 candidates in the exam, 29.5% went into specialist training in ophthalmology. Some appeared in the top 20 more than once, with 56% of them going into ophthalmic training, but they had a similar median time to enter training as those who appeared in the top 20 once. There was no significant evidence to suggest that the overall median ranking scores between the UK medical schools differed (P=0.23; Kruskal-Wallis test). However, there was a marked difference in frequency of top 20 candidates from each medical school, which could not be explained by the size of the medical school alone. CONCLUSION: It is difficult to conclude from these findings the importance that the Duke-Elder examination has in the selection of trainees into ophthalmology. The role of cognitive factors in selection into postgraduate medical/surgical training is discussed, along with the potential academic criteria, which may influence interview scores.
AIMS: Cognitive factors (eg, academic achievement) have had a significant role in selecting postgraduate surgical trainees in the past. This project sought to determine the role of a national undergraduate ophthalmology prize examination (Duke-Elder examination) in the selection of postgraduate ophthalmology trainees. This would also serve as a quality assurance exercise for the assessment, in which the ultimate aim is to encourage trainees into ophthalmology. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the top 20 ranked candidates in the Duke-Elder examination from 1989 to 2005 (except 1995) was carried out to determine which of them subsequently entered the ophthalmic training and General Medical Council Specialist Registers. RESULTS: Out of the top 20 candidates in the exam, 29.5% went into specialist training in ophthalmology. Some appeared in the top 20 more than once, with 56% of them going into ophthalmic training, but they had a similar median time to enter training as those who appeared in the top 20 once. There was no significant evidence to suggest that the overall median ranking scores between the UK medical schools differed (P=0.23; Kruskal-Wallis test). However, there was a marked difference in frequency of top 20 candidates from each medical school, which could not be explained by the size of the medical school alone. CONCLUSION: It is difficult to conclude from these findings the importance that the Duke-Elder examination has in the selection of trainees into ophthalmology. The role of cognitive factors in selection into postgraduate medical/surgical training is discussed, along with the potential academic criteria, which may influence interview scores.
Authors: Karlijn Overeem; Marjan J Faber; Onyebuchi A Arah; Glyn Elwyn; Kiki M J M H Lombarts; Hub C Wollersheim; Richard P T M Grol Journal: Med Educ Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 6.251