Data sharing and big data in health professions education: Ottawa consensus statement and recommendations for scholarship.

Changes in digital technology, increasing volume of data collection, and advances in methods have the potential to unleash the value of big data generated through the education of health professionals. Coupled with this potential are legitimate concerns about how data can be used or misused in ways that limit autonomy, equity, or harm stakeholders. This consensus statement is intended to address these issues by foregrounding the ethical imperatives for engaging with big data as well as the potential risks and challenges. Recognizing the wide and ever evolving scope of big data scholarship, we focus on foundational issues for framing and engaging in research. We ground our recommendations in the context of big data created through data sharing across and within the stages of the continuum of the education and training of health professionals. Ultimately, the goal of this statement is to support a culture of trust and quality for big data research to deliver on its promises for health professions education (HPE) and the health of society. Based on expert consensus and review of the literature, we report 19 recommendations in (1) framing scholarship and research through research, (2) considering unique ethical practices, (3) governance of data sharing collaborations that engage stakeholders, (4) data sharing processes best practices, (5) the importance of knowledge translation, and (6) advancing the quality of scholarship through multidisciplinary collaboration. The recommendations were modified and refined based on feedback from the 2022 Ottawa Conference attendees and subsequent public engagement. Adoption of these recommendations can help HPE scholars share data ethically and engage in high impact big data scholarship, which in turn can help the field meet the ultimate goal: high-quality education that leads to high-quality healthcare.

Predicting success at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of surgery (MRCS) examination: The Syme Medal report.

BACKGROUND: The MRCS is a key gatekeeping assessment in the UK, completion of which is a prerequisite for progression into higher specialist surgical training (HST) programmes. As a result, examination success or failure can have a significant and lasting impact on career progression. Yet despite such high stakes, little was known about factors that may influence examination performance. METHODS: To address this important gap in the literature, a series of large longitudinal cohort studies were undertaken. The work used data crossmatched from several national medical education databases to create the most extensive investigation of training outcomes for UK surgical trainees to date. MRCS data were matched to sociodemographic factors, training history and measures of prior academic attainment, and multivariate analyses identified independent predictors of MRCS success. RESULTS: Three key quantifiable factors were identified that predict success at MRCS: institutional differences in teaching and training, academic ability and individual differences in personal and social circumstances. This invited report for the Syme Medal discusses the key findings from this body of research and the implications for policy and practice. CONCLUSIONS: The research studies discussed in this report are driving evidence-based changes at the national level. The findings contribute to the optimisation of surgical training and the recognition of candidates at increased risk of failure. This results in the appropriate reallocation of resources and support, enabling greater fairness, equity, diversity and inclusivity in surgical career progression.

The impact of disability on recruitment to higher surgical specialty training: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: UK examining bodies are required to eliminate discrimination against people with protected characteristics. To achieve this in surgery, differential attainment (DA) in assessments used as gatekeepers to career progression must be ruled out. This study investigated the impact of disability status on the likelihood of success at national selection for Higher Surgical Training (HST). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all UK graduates in the UKMED database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk) who underwent selection for HST (ST3) from 2012 to 2019 (n = 2875). Univariate analysis identified differences in success rates at first-application. Logistic regression models identified whether disability was a predictor of success after adjusting for sociodemographic factors and prior MRCS performance. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in success rates between candidates with and without disabilities (all p > 0.05) for any surgical specialty. Disability status was not a statistically significant predictor of success. Female candidates were 25 % more likely to be successful (OR 1.25 [95%CI 1.05 to 1.49]) and Non-White candidates were 20 % less likely to be successful (OR 0.80 [95%CI 0.68 to 0.96]). Candidates who passed MRCS Part A and Part B at the first attempt were 49 % (OR 1.49 [95%CI 1.25 to 1.77]) and 90 % (OR 1.90 [95%CI 1.58 to 2.28]) more likely to be successful. CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found in the likelihood of being successful at HST selection for any surgical specialty between applicants with and without disabilities, regardless of type of disability. DA was identified between other sociodemographic groups which requires further exploration.

The hidden costs of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal College of surgeons examinations: Can trainees afford it?

BACKGROUND: The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is a mandatory requirement for higher specialty surgical training in the UK. However, there is a significant economic impact on trainees which raises the question of whether the costs of this exam hinder surgical career progression. This study explores the burden of these exams on trainees. METHODS: A 37-point questionnaire was distributed to all trainees who were preparing for or have sat MRCS examinations. Univariate analyses included the cost of the preparatory resources, extra hours worked to pay for these and the examinations, and the number of annual leave (AL) days taken to prepare. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to identify possible correlation between monetary expenditure and success rate. RESULTS: On average, trainees (n â€‹= â€‹145) spent £332.54, worked 31.2 â€‹h in addition to their rostered hours, and used 5.8 AL days to prepare for MRCS Part A. For MRCS Part B/ENT, trainees spent on average £682.92, worked 41.7 extra hours, and used 5 AL days. Overall, the average trainee spent 5-9% of their salary and one-fifth of their AL allowance to prepare for the exams. There was a positive correlation between number of attempts and monetary expenditure on Part A preparation (r(109)=0.536, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable financial and social toll of the MRCS examination on trainees. Reducing this is crucial to tackle workforce challenges that include trainee retention and burnout. Further studies exploring study habits can help reform study budget policies to ease this pressure on trainees.

Retention of surgical trainees in England.

BACKGROUND: Surgical training is a competitive process attracting highly motivated clinicians. The National Health Service is currently facing long waiting lists and a workforce crisis yet there is a paucity of data regarding attrition of surgical trainees in England. This study aims to describe the attrition of surgical trainees from 2016 to 2021 and explore the relationship between specialty competition ratios and attrition rates. METHODS: Data was obtained from Health Education England by freedom of information requests. Binary logistic regression analyses explored differences in attrition between surgical specialties. Spearman's correlation was used to assess the relationship between competition ratios and attrition rates. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2021, 481 surgical trainees have left surgical training, with an average yearly attrition rate of 2.68%. This number varied considerably across specialties with Paediatric Surgery having the highest rate at 4.20% and Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery (T&O) the lowest at 1.52%. Compared to General Surgery, trainees in Neurosurgery, T&O and Plastic Surgery were significantly less likely to leave their respective programmes (OR 95% CI 0.53 (0.33-0.85) p = 0.009, 0.44 (0.34-0.58) p < 0.001, 0.51 (0.33-0.78) p = 0.002, respectively). Attrition rates were inversely related to competition ratios, with more competitive specialties experiencing less attrition (ρ = - 0.302 (p = 0.078)). CONCLUSION: These data highlight the increasing attrition of surgical trainees over recent years, with some specialties experiencing greater rates of attrition than others. Qualitative research and exit interviews are needed to ascertain the causal factors behind the attrition of surgical trainees to improve training and retention of this highly skilled workforce.

Examining the diversity of MRCS examiners.

BACKGROUND: MRCS examiners are the face of the Royal College of Surgeons for early-career surgeons and should therefore represent the workforce they are examining as not to marginalise or negatively impact on the assessment experience of candidates from minoritised groups. This study aimed to explore the diversity of MRCS examiners and whether they represent the demographics of the MRCS candidates. METHODS: A retrospective observational study including all active examiners and examination candidates who attempted MRCS Part A or Part B between January 2020 and July 2021. Self-declared demographic data collected by the Intercollegiate Committee for Basic Surgical Examinations (ICBSE) included gender, sexual orientation, disability status and ethnicity. Following data anonymisation, total group response frequencies were made available to the research team for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Chi-squared analyses showed statistically significant differences in the representation of gender, disability and ethnicity between candidates and examiners (all p < 0.001). Men (83.9% (n = 1121) vs 70.9% (n = 6017) respectively), individuals without disability (98.7% (n = 917) vs 96.1% (n = 6847)) and individuals of White ethnicity (36.6% (n = 346) vs 20.4% (n = 1223)) were significantly overrepresented in the examiners compared to the examination candidates. There was no statistically significant difference in sexual orientation between examiners and candidates (p = 0.712). CONCLUSIONS: Broadly speaking, the socio-demographic profile of MRCS examiners reflects that seen in senior and leadership positions in surgery in the UK - that is, predominantly male and White - but not that seen in early-career surgeons. Positive action is now required in examiner recruitment by the Royal Colleges to ensure that the cohort of MRCS examiners reflects the modern surgical workforce.

Establishing the predictive validity of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal Colleges of surgeons written examination: MRCS Part A.

Successful completion of the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is mandatory for surgical trainees entering higher specialist training in the United Kingdom. Despite its international reputation, and the value placed on the examination in surgical training, there has been little evidence of its predictive validity until recently. In this review, we present a summary of findings of four recent Intercollegiate studies assessing the predictive validity of the MRCS Part A (written) examination. Data from all four studies showed statistically significant positive correlations between the MRCS Part A and other written examinations taken by surgical trainees over the course of their education. The studies summarised in this review provide compelling evidence for the predictive validity of this gatekeeping examination. This review will be of interest to trainees, training institutions and the Royal Colleges given the value placed on the examination by surgical training programmes.

Establishing the predictive validity of the intercollegiate membership of the Royal Colleges of surgeons written examination: MRCS part B.

The Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) is a high-stakes postgraduate examination taken by thousands of surgical trainees worldwide every year. The MRCS is a challenging assessment, highly regarded by surgical training programmes and valued as a gatekeeper to the surgical profession. The examination is taken at considerable personal, social and financial cost to surgical trainees, and failure has significant implications for career progression. Given the value placed on MRCS, it must be a reliable and valid assessment of the knowledge and skills of early-career surgeons. Our first article 'Establishing the Predictive Validity of the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons Written Examination: MRCS Part A' discussed the principles of assessment reliability and validity and outlined the mounting evidence supporting the predictive validity of the MRCS Part A (the multiple-choice questionnaire component of the examination). This, the second article in the series discusses six recently published studies investigating the predictive validity of the MRCS Part B (the clinical component of the examination). All national longitudinal cohort studies reviewed have demonstrated significant correlations between MRCS Part B and other assessments taken during the UK surgical training pathway, supporting the predictive validity of MRCS Part B. This review will be of interest to trainees, trainers and Royal Colleges given the value placed on the examination by surgical training programmes.

Performance at medical school selection correlates with success in Part A of the intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.

Medical schools in the UK typically use prior academic attainment and an admissions test (University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT), Biomedical Admissions Test (BMAT) or the Graduate Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT)) to help select applicants for interview. To justify their use, more information is needed about the predictive validity of these tests. Thus, we investigated the relationship between performance in admissions tests and the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination.The UKMED database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk) was used to access medical school selection data for all UK graduates who attempted MRCS Part A (n=11 570) and Part B (n=5690) between 2007 and 2019. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models identified independent predictors of MRCS success. Pearson correlation coefficients examined the linear relationship between test scores and MRCS performance.Successful MRCS Part A candidates scored higher in A-Levels, UCAT, BMAT and GAMSAT (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed for MRCS Part B. All admissions tests were found to independently predict MRCS Part A performance after adjusting for prior academic attainment (A-Level performance) (p<0.05). Admission test scores demonstrated statistically significant correlations with MRCS Part A performance (p<0.001).The utility of admissions tests is clear with respect to helping medical schools select from large numbers of applicants for a limited number of places. Additionally, these tests appear to offer incremental value above A-Level performance alone. We expect this data to guide medical schools' use of admissions test scores in their selection process.

A cross-sectional study examining MRCS performance by core surgical training location.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, core surgical training (CST) is the first specialty experience that early-career surgeons receive but training differs significantly across CST deaneries. To identify the impact these differences have on trainee performance, we assessed whether success at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examinations is associated with CST deanery. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of UK trainees in CST who attempted MRCS between 2014 and 2020 (n = 1104). Chi-squared tests examined associations between locality and first-attempt MRCS performance. Multivariate logistic regression models identified the likelihood of MRCS success depending on CST deanery. RESULTS: MRCS Part A and Part B pass rates were associated with CST deanery (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). Candidates that trained in Thames Valley (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.52 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.00-6.42), North Central and East London (OR 2.37 [95% CI 1.04-5.40]) or South London (OR 2.36 [95% CI 1.09-5.10]) were each more than twice as likely to pass MRCS Part A at first attempt. Trainees from North Central and East London were more than ten times more likely to pass MRCS Part B at first attempt (OR 10.59 [95% CI 1.23-51.00]). However, 68% of candidates attempted Part A prior to CST and 48% attempted Part B before or during the first year of CST. CONCLUSION: MRCS performance is associated with CST deanery; however, many candidates passed the exam with little or any CST experience suggesting that some deaneries attract high academic performers. MRCS performance is therefore not a suitable marker of CST training quality.

The Surgical Trainer.

The 'no training today, no surgeons tomorrow' campaign on social media has been a rallying call for all surgeons worldwide to prioritize training as part of the COVID-19 pandemic recovery process. The campaign calls for all trainers to treat every case as a training opportunity. However, this raises some important questions. Who are the surgical trainers responsible for these changes? Are modern surgical trainers defined by a role within their department? How can such contributions to training be recognized? These questions are discussed within this perspectives article, including the need for the professionalization of the trainer role and how contributions to training can be formalized and supported within departments and at a national or international level.

Urology boot camp for medical students: Using virtual technology to enhance undergraduate education.

Objectives: The study aims to describe the methodology of converting the urology boot camp for medical students into a virtual course with key take home points for a successful conversion and to present quantitative and qualitative data demonstrating the impact of the boot camp on improving delegates' knowledge and clinical acumen. Materials and methods: The face-to-face boot camp was converted to a virtual format employing a variety of techniques including; utilizing an online platform to deliver live screened lectures, using online polling software to foster an interactive learning environment and displaying pre-recorded videos to teach practical skills. Validated Multiple Choice Questionnaires (MCQs) were used prior to and after the course. This enabled the assessment of delegates' knowledge of urology according to the national undergraduate curriculum, and paired t tests were used to quantify the level of improvement. Thematic analysis was carried out on post-course delegate feedback to identify highlights of the course and ways of improving future iterations. Results: In total, 131 delegates took part in the pilot virtual course. Of these, 105 delegates completed the pre- and post-course MCQs. There was a statistically significant improvement in the assessment following the course (p = <0.001) with mean score increasing from 47.5% pre-course to 65.8% post-course. All delegates who attended the most recent implementation of the virtual course (n = 31) felt it improved their knowledge and confidence in urology. Twenty delegates (64.5%) felt that it prepared them for both final year medical school examinations and working as a foundation year doctor. Positive themes in feedback were identified, which included the interactive nature of the course, the quality of teaching, the level and content of information provided and the high yield, concise organization of the teaching schedule. Conclusion: Using virtual technology and innovative educational frameworks, we have demonstrated the successful conversion of the urology boot camp for medical students to a virtual format. At a national level, with support from the British Association of Urological Surgeons, the face-to-face component of the course will continue to run in parallel with the virtual course with the aim of standardizing and improving UK undergraduate urological education. The virtual course has been implemented on an international scale, and this has already shown promising results.

MRCS Performance by OMFS trainees: an update and call to action.

Completion of the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination is a prerequisite for completion of specialty surgical training in UK. The aim of this study was to compare MRCS performance of OMFS trainees to trainees in other specialities over the past 13 years. Differential attainment (DA) was noted in MRCS Part A (MCQ) pass rates. There was no statistically significant difference in MRCS Part B pass rates. The reasons for this DA are currently unknown and require further investigation. It has been suggested that this may be due at least in part to competing time, family and financial obligations, which increase over time.

Does performance at the intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examination vary according to UK medical school and course type? A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The knowledge, skills and behaviours required of new UK medical graduates are the same but how these are achieved differs given medical schools vary in their mission, curricula and pedagogy. Medical school differences seem to influence performance on postgraduate assessments. To date, the relationship between medical schools, course types and performance at the Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons examination (MRCS) has not been investigated. Understanding this relationship is vital to achieving alignment across undergraduate and postgraduate training, learning and assessment values. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective longitudinal cohort study of UK medical graduates who attempted MRCS Part A (n=9730) and MRCS Part B (n=4645) between 2007 and 2017, using individual-level linked sociodemographic and prior academic attainment data from the UK Medical Education Database. METHODS: We studied MRCS performance across all UK medical schools and examined relationships between potential predictors and MRCS performance using χ2 analysis. Multivariate logistic regression models identified independent predictors of MRCS success at first attempt. RESULTS: MRCS pass rates differed significantly between individual medical schools (p<0.001) but not after adjusting for prior A-Level performance. Candidates from courses other than those described as problem-based learning (PBL) were 53% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.87) and 54% more likely to pass Part B (OR 1.54 (1.05 to 2.25)) at first attempt after adjusting for prior academic performance. Attending a Standard-Entry 5-year medicine programme, having no prior degree and attending a Russell Group university were independent predictors of MRCS success in regression models (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences in MRCS performance between medical schools. However, this variation is largely due to individual factors such as academic ability, rather than medical school factors. This study also highlights group level attainment differences that warrant further investigation to ensure equity within medical training.

Application of human factors at hybrid meetings: facilitating productivity and inclusivity.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the widespread use of virtual meetings and conferences. As the healthcare sector attempts to return to normality, face-to-face meetings have started to resume. However, ongoing travel restrictions, risk of viral transmission, the Omicron variant, and requirements for self-isolation, have necessitated the use of novel hybrid meeting formats. These enable participants to attend either in person or virtually using various online platforms such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom. Well organised and facilitated hybrid meetings can combine the advantages of in-person meetings with virtual participation, although the dynamics of communication between attendees is considerably different. This article discusses the benefits and pitfalls of the hybrid format, the human factors that impact productivity and inclusivity, and how to address them in future meetings.

Differential attainment at MRCS according to gender, ethnicity, age and socioeconomic factors: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: A recent independent review on diversity and inclusivity highlighted concerns that barriers to surgical career progression exist for some groups of individuals and not others. Group-level differences in performance at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS) examinations have been identified but are yet to be investigated. We aimed to characterise the relationship between sociodemographic differences and performance at MRCS. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: All UK MRCS candidates attempting Part A (n = 5780) and Part B (n = 2600) between 2013 and 2019 with linked sociodemographic data in the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Chi-square tests established univariate associations with MRCS performance. Multiple logistic regression identified independent predictors of success, adjusted for medical school performance. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in MRCS pass rates were found according to gender, ethnicity, age, graduate status, educational background and socioeconomic status (all p < 0.05). After adjusting for prior academic attainment, being male (odds ratio [OR] 2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.87-2.92) or a non-graduate (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.44-2.74) were independent predictors of MRCS Part A success and being a non-graduate (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.15-2.71) and having attended a fee-paying school (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.08-2.10) were independent predictors of Part B success. Black and minority ethnic groups were significantly less likely to pass MRCS Part B at their first attempt (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.92 for Black candidates and OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35-0.69 for Asian candidates) compared to White candidates. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant group-level differential attainment at MRCS, likely to represent the accumulation of privilege and disadvantage experienced by individuals throughout their education and training. Those leading surgical education now have a responsibility to identify and address the causes of these attainment differences.

Does decentralisation of surgical management improve outcomes for paediatric testicular torsion?

INTRODUCTION: In testicular torsion (TT), delayed emergency scrotal exploration (ESE) increases the risk of orchidectomy. Transfer of a patient with suspected TT from a district general hospital (DGH) to a paediatric surgical centre (PSC) delays ESE and potentially puts them at increased risk of testicular loss. Prior to 1st January 2017, all boys under aged <16 years presenting to a DGH within the East Midlands Clinical Network (EMCN) would be referred to the PSC. From this date, it was agreed within the EMCN that boys aged ≥5 years with suspected TT presenting to a network DGH would be managed locally, barring exceptional circumstances. Boys aged <5 years would be referred to the PSC for management. AIM: This study aimed to assess the impact of decentralisation of ESE for suspected TT on orchidectomy rates in the EMCN. METHODS: All patients who underwent ESE under the care of paediatric surgery in the PSC, and all patients <16 years old who underwent ESE in 4 EMCN DGHs between January 2017 and December 2019 were identified. Neonatal cases and inpatient referrals were excluded. Comparison was made with published data on ESE performed in the PSC over the 9 years 2008-2016 prior to decentralisation. RESULTS: In the 9 years prior to decentralisation, there were 110 cases of TT in the PSC. In the subsequent 3 years, there were 40 in the PSC and 37 in the DGHs. The orchidectomy rate of boys with TT presenting to DGHs and undergoing exploration locally (16%, 6/37) contrasts with the rate in those transferred from DGHs to the PSC for exploration (58%, 15/26). The difference is highly significant (p = 0.00059, RR 0.28 [95% CI 0.13-0.63]) and indicates that in the EMCN, avoiding hospital transfer and performing ESE at the presenting DGH reduces the risk of orchidectomy by 72%. CONCLUSION: Decentralisation of the provision of ESE in boys with TT has resulted in a significantly lower orchidectomy rate in boys undergoing ESE in the presenting hospital than when transferred to the PSC. This study reinforces existing literature that demonstrates the effect of delayed ESE on orchidectomy rate, and supports the recommendations of national guidelines in the UK that transfer of boys to a PSC for ESE should only occur in exceptional circumstances.

Does performance at medical school predict success at the Intercollegiate Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination? A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying predictors of success in postgraduate examinations can help guide the career choices of medical students and may aid early identification of trainees requiring extra support to progress in specialty training. We assessed whether performance on the educational performance measurement (EPM) and situational judgement test (SJT) used for selection into foundation training predicted success at the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination. METHODS: This was a longitudinal, cohort study using data from the UK Medical Education Database (https://www.ukmed.ac.uk). UK medical graduates who had attempted Part A (n=2585) and Part B (n=755) of the MRCS between 2014 and 2017 were included. χ2 and independent t-tests were used to examine the relationship between medical school performance and sociodemographic factors with first-attempt success at MRCS Part A and B. Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify independent predictors of MRCS performance. RESULTS: The odds of passing MRCS increased by 55% for Part A (OR 1.55 (95% CI 1.48 to 1.61)) and 23% for Part B (1.23 (1.14 to 1.32)) for every additional EPM decile point gained. For every point awarded for additional degrees in the EPM, candidates were 20% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.20 (1.13 to 1.29)) and 17% more likely to pass Part B (1.17 (1.04 to 1.33)). For every point awarded for publications in the EPM, candidates were 14% more likely to pass MRCS Part A (1.14 (1.01 to 1.28)). SJT score was not a statistically significant independent predictor of MRCS success. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the EPM's independent predictive power and found that medical school performance deciles are the most significant measure of predicting later success in the MRCS. These findings can be used by medical schools, training boards and workforce planners to inform evidence-based and contemporary selection and assessment strategies.

'No visible lesions?'-an unusual case of Intestinal metaplasia of the bladder.

Intestinal metaplasia (IM) of the bladder is an extremely rare benign condition. The clinical features are similar to other bladder tumours. Its pathogenesis is unclear and its role as a precursor of adenocarcinoma has long been debated. Transurethral resection is the main form of treatment for IM. We report the case of a 49-year-old gentleman who presented with visible haematuria. He was submitted to multiple cystoscopies which showed no macroscopic irregularities. Radiological (CT urogram and multiparametric MRI) imaging revealed abnormalities within the bladder neck, suspicious of a neoplastic lesion. Following transurethral resection of his trigonal area, pathology demonstrated IM occurring on a background of cystitis glandularis. This case highlights the unusual difficulty in macroscopically diagnosing IM of the bladder compared to other neoplasms of the bladder. Therefore, in patients with persistent visible haematuria there should be a low threshold to perform biopsies.