HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Turner, E. S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Turner, E. S.

The MRCPsych examination application process: room for improvement?

Queen Elizabeth Psychiatric Hospital, Birmingham B15 2QZ

Communication and empathy are hallmarks of psychiatry. These skills are rightly emphasised throughout training and the MRCPsych examinations. I would like to think the College displays these qualities in its dealings with trainees. However, the application process for the examinations raises concerns that this is not always the case.

The College aims to notify applicants of eligibility ‘approximately four weeks in advance [of the exam]’. However, some candidates have learned of their ineligibility less than 2 weeks prior to the exam, and then only after contacting the College themselves. In the event of such late decisions, any appeal would need to occur with urgency, yet the frustrating inability to speak to the appropriate authority prevents this and perpetuates distress.

At a minimum the College should keep to its own standards. However, since a preparation time of 6 months has been recommended for the part II examination (Naeem et al, 2003), I would suggest a longer period of notice, such as 8 weeks, is necessary. This would spare unsuccessful applicants the trauma of the final 2 months, when revision is most intense.

I appreciate that approval of eligibility is a laborious process. The ever-increasing number of applicants means the College might be relying on an outdated system. Perhaps the extra examination revenue generated could provide a more efficient system, thus minimising the anxieties of applicants.

Is there a danger of trainee disillusionment with the College regarding the examination procedure, and could this impact upon recruitment and retention of future psychiatrists?

References

NAEEM, A., RUTHERFORD, J. & KENN, C. (2003) The New MRCPsych Part II exam - golden tips on how to pass. Psychiatric Bulletin, 27, 390 -393.[Free Full Text]

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Turner, E. S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Turner, E. S.