Performance of ethnic minority versus White doctors in the MRCGP assessment 2016–2021: a cross-sectional study

Background Differential attainment has previously been suggested as being due to subjective bias because of racial discrimination in clinical skills assessments. Aim To investigate differential attainment in all UK general practice licensing tests comparing ethnic minority with White doctors. Design and setting Observational study of doctors in GP specialty training in the UK. Method Data were analysed from doctors’ selection in 2016 to the end of GP training, linking selection, licensing, and demographic data to develop multivariable logistic regression models. Predictors of pass rates were identified for each assessment. Results A total of 3429 doctors entering GP specialty training in 2016 were included, with doctors of different sex (female 63.81% versus male 36.19%), ethnic group (White British 53.95%, minority ethnic 43.04%, and mixed 3.01%), country of primary medical qualification (UK 76.76% versus non-UK 23.24%), and declared disability (disability declared 11.98% versus not declared 88.02%). Multi-Specialty Recruitment Assessment (MSRA) scores were highly predictive for GP training end-point assessments, including the Applied Knowledge Test (AKT), Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA), Recorded Consultation Assessment (RCA), and Workplace-Based Assessment (WPBA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP). Ethnic minority doctors did significantly better compared with White British doctors in the AKT (odds ratio [OR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 4.10, P = 0.042). There were no significant differences on other assessments: CSA (OR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.20, P = 0.201), RCA (OR 0.48, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.32, P = 0.156), or WPBA—ARCP (OR 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.01, P = 0.057). Conclusion Ethnic background did not reduce the chance of passing GP licensing tests once sex, place of primary medical qualification, declared disability, and MSRA scores were accounted for.