Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Holland, R.
Right arrow Articles by Shepstone, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Holland, R.
Right arrow Articles by Shepstone, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Public Health Medicine 24:58-62 (2002)
© 2002 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

An analysis of predictors of success in Part II MFPHM


R. Holland
I. Harvey
L. Shepstone

School of Medicine, Health Policy & Practice, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ. r.holland{at}uea.ac.uk

Background The examination for Part II of the Membership of the Faculty of Public Health Medicine (MFPHM) has been held since 1974. Candidates and examiners have hypothesized a number of factors as likely to increase the chances of success in the exam. This study formally investigates factors which may predict a candidate's success at their first attempt.

Methods Routinely available data on candidates sitting the exam from March 1996 to June 1999 were examined initially by univariate analysis. A logistic regression model was then constructed entering all variables identified as statistically significant as well as the following variables initially thought to be relevant (a priori hypotheses): age, sex, university versus NHS training location; splitting competencies evenly across two reports; and training within North Thames deanery.

Results Four factors were identified as statistically significant within the logistic regression model. These were: possession of either MRCP (odds ratio (OR) of failure = 0.33, p = 0.003) or MRCGP (OR = 0.45, p = 0.016), success at UK Part I at first attempt (OR = 0.42, p = 0.014), and North Thames training (OR = 0.44, p = 0.048).

Conclusion Possession of MRCP or MRCGP, or passing UK Part I MFPHM are factors not normally open to change by candidates once they begin working towards Part II MFPHM. Training in North Thames was also identified as an independent predictor of success. It would seem advisable to investigate in further detail whether candidate selection (not adjusted for in the model) or aspects of the North Thames training programme are responsible for this observed phenomenon.

Keywords: education, examination, public health medicine, pass rate


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.