Medical school origins of award-winning anaesthetists; analysis of a complete national dataset.

BACKGROUND: The ultimate aim of medical education is to produce successful practitioners, which is a goal that educators, students and stakeholders support. These groups consider success to comprise optimum patient care with consequently positive career progression. Accordingly, identification of the common educational features of such high-achieving doctors will facilitate the generation of clinical excellence amongst future medical trainees. In our study we source data from British clinical merit award schemes and subsequently identify the medical school origins of anaesthetists who have achieved at least national distinction. METHODS: Britain operates Distinction Award/Clinical Excellence Award schemes which honour National Health Service doctors in Scotland, Wales and England who are identified as high achievers. This quantitative observational study used these awards as an outcome measure in an analysis of the 2019-20 dataset of all 901 national award-winning doctors. Where appropriate, Pearson's Chi-Square test was applied. RESULTS: The top five medical schools (London university medical schools, Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen and Glasgow) were responsible for 56.4% of the anaesthetist award-winners, despite the dataset representing 85 medical schools. 93.6% of the anaesthetist merit award-winners were from European medical schools. 8.06% of the anaesthetist award-winners were international medical graduates compared with 11.5% non-anaesthetist award-winners being international medical graduates. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of anaesthetists who were national merit award-winners originated from only five, apparently overrepresented, UK university medical schools. In contrast, there was a greater diversity of medical school origins among the lower grade national award-winners; tier 3 award-winners represented 20 different medical schools from three continents. As well as ranking educationally successful university medical schools, this study assists UK and international students, by providing a roadmap for rational decision making when selecting anaesthetist and non-anaesthetist medical education pathways that are more likely to fulfil their career ambitions.

Medical school origins of award-winning pathologists; analysis of a complete national dataset.

BACKGROUND: The ultimate aim of medical education is to produce successful practitioners, which is a goal that educators, students and stakeholders support. These groups consider success to comprise optimum patient care with consequently positive career progression. Accordingly, identification of the common educational features of such high-achieving doctors will facilitate the generation of clinical excellence amongst future medical trainees. In our study we source data from British clinical merit award schemes and subsequently identify the medical school origins of pathologists who have achieved at least national distinction. METHODS: Britain operates Distinction Award/Clinical Excellence Award schemes which honour National Health Service doctors in Scotland, Wales and England who are identified as high achievers. This quantitative observational study used these awards as an outcome measure in an analysis of the 2019-20 dataset of all 901 national award-winning doctors. Where appropriate, Pearson's Chi-Square test was applied. RESULTS: The top five medical schools (London university medical schools, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Oxford and Cambridge) were responsible for 60.4% of the pathologist award-winners, despite the dataset representing 85 medical schools. 96.4% of the pathologist merit award-winners were from European medical schools. 9.0% of the pathologist award-winners were international medical graduates in comparison with 11.4% of all 901 award-winners being international medical graduates. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of pathologists who were national merit award-winners originated from only five, apparently overrepresented, UK university medical schools. In contrast, there was a greater diversity in medical school origin among the lower grade national award-winners; the largest number of international medical graduates were in these tier 3 awards (13.9%). As well as ranking educationally successful university medical schools, this study assists UK and international students, by providing a roadmap for rational decision making when selecting pathologist and non-pathologist medical education pathways that are more likely to fulfil their career ambitions.

Medical school origins of award-winning psychiatrists; analysis of a complete national dataset.

BACKGROUND: Britain attracts doctors from all over the world to work in the National Health Service. Elucidating the educational backgrounds of award-winning doctors working in the country is potentially an important medical education issue and a merit award audit. Using the British clinical merit award schemes as outcome measures, we identify medical school origins of award-winning doctors who have been identified as having achieved national or international prominence. METHODS: The Clinical Excellence Awards/Distinction Awards schemes select doctors in Britain who are classified as high achievers, with categories for national prominence and above. We used this outcome measure in a quantitative observational analysis of the 2019-20 dataset of all 901 award-winning doctors. Pearson's Chi-Square test was used where appropriate. RESULTS: Five university medical schools (London university medical schools, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Cambridge) accounted for 59.1% of the psychiatrist award-winning doctors in the 2019 round, despite the dataset representing 85 medical schools. 84.1% of the psychiatrist award-winners were from European medical schools, compared to 92.1% of the non-psychiatrist award-winners. International medical graduates accounted for 22.7% of the award-winning psychiatrists. Psychiatrists with the lower grade national awards came from a more diverse educational background of 17 medical schools. IMGs represented diverse medical schools from five continents and were most represented in the lowest grade of national merit awards at 24.2%. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the award-winning psychiatrists originated from only five medical schools. A greater diversity of medical school origin existed for the lowest grade national psychiatrist award-winners. International medical graduates contributed substantially to these award-winners; psychiatrist award-winners were more likely to be international medical graduates (22.7%) than non-psychiatrist award-winners (10.8%). This study not only indicates educational centres associated with the production of award-winners but also provides students with a roadmap for rational decision making when selecting medical schools.

Medical school origins of award-winning physicians; analysis of a complete national dataset.

BACKGROUND: Educators and medical students share the same objective of achieving success in medical practice. Both groups consider doctors' successes to include optimum patient care outcomes and positive career progressions. Accordingly, identifying common educational features of such high-achieving doctors facilitates the generation of excellence amongst future medical trainees. In this study we use data from the British clinical merit award schemes as outcome measures in order to identify medical school origins of doctors who have achieved national or international prominence. METHODS: Britain has Clinical Excellence Awards/Distinction Awards schemes that financially reward all National Health Service doctors in England, Scotland and Wales who are classified as high achievers. We used these outcome measures in a quantitative observational analysis of the 2019-20 dataset of all 901 national award-winning doctors. Where appropriate, Pearson's Chi-Square test was applied. RESULTS: The top five medical schools (London university medical schools, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Oxford and Cambridge) were responsible for 51.2% of the physician merit award-winners in the 2019-20 round, despite the dataset representing 85 medical schools. 91.4% of the physician merit award-winners were from European medical schools. The lowest national award-winners (tier 3) originated from 61 medical schools representing six continents. International medical graduates comprised 11.4% of all award-winners. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of physicians who were national merit award-winners originated from only five, apparently overrepresented, UK university medical schools. In contrast, there was a greater diversity in medical school origin among the lower grade national merit awards; the largest number of international medical graduates were in these tier 3 awards (13.3%). As well as ranking educationally successful university medical schools, this study assists UK and international students, by providing a roadmap for rational decision making when selecting physician and non-physician medical education pathways that are more likely to fulfil their career ambitions.

Medical school origins of award-winning surgeons; analysis of a complete national dataset.

BACKGROUND: Britain attracts doctors from all over the world to work in the National Health Service. Elucidating the educational backgrounds of award-winning doctors working in the country is potentially an important medical education issue and merit award audit. Using the British clinical merit award schemes as outcome measures, we identify medical school origins of award-winning doctors who have been identified as having achieved national or international prominence. METHODS: The Clinical Excellence Awards/Distinction Awards schemes select doctors in Britain who are classified as high achievers, with categories for national prominence and above. We used this outcome measure in a quantitative observational analysis of the 2019 dataset of all 901 award-winning doctors. Pearson's Chi-Square test was used where appropriate. RESULTS: Seven medical schools (London university medical schools, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Oxford, Cambridge and Manchester) accounted for 52.7% of the surgical award-winning doctors in the 2019 round, despite the dataset representing 85 medical schools. Surgeons with the lower grade national awards came from a more diverse educational background of 43 medical schools. International medical graduates accounted for 16.1% of the award-winning surgeons and 9.8% of the award-winning non-surgeons. 87.1% of the surgical award-winners were from European medical schools, whereas 93.2% of the non-surgical award-winners were from European medical schools. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the award-winning surgeons originated from only seven, overrepresented, medical schools. A greater diversity of medical school origin existed for the lowest grade national merit awards. These comprised 43 medical schools and indicated greater globalization effects in this category. International medical graduates contributed substantially to these award holders; surgical award-winners were more likely to be international medical graduates (16.1%) than non-surgical award-winners (9.8%). This study not only indicates educational centres associated with the production of award-winners but also provides students with a roadmap for rational decision making when selecting medical schools.