Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

The candidate perspective of the clinical competency test (CCT) of the MICGP examination: a mixed-methods study

Tony Foley, Kathleen McLoughlin, Elaine K Walsh, Paul Leggett, Muríosa O'Reilly, Molly Owens and Aisling A Jennings
BJGP Open 2018; 2 (3): bjgpopen18X101605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen18X101605
Tony Foley
1 Lecturer, Department of General Practice, University College Cork, , Ireland
2 Co-Convener of the CCT Exam, Examination Committee of the Irish College of General Practitioners, Irish College of General Practitioners, , Ireland
MRCGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tonyfoley@ucc.ie
Kathleen McLoughlin
3 Research Fellow, Department of General Practice, University College Cork, , Ireland
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elaine K Walsh
4 Lecturer, Department of General Practice, University College Cork, , Ireland
MICGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul Leggett
5 Co-Convener of the CCT Exam, Examination Committee of the Irish College of General Practitioners, Irish College of General Practitioners, , Ireland
MRCGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Muríosa O'Reilly
6 MICGP Exam Manager, Examination Committee of the Irish College of General Practitioners, Irish College of General Practitioners, , Ireland
BA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Molly Owens
7 Chair of the MICGP Exam, Examination Committee of the Irish College of General Practitioners, Irish College of General Practitioners, , Ireland
MICGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aisling A Jennings
8 Clinical Research Fellow, Department of General Practice, University College Cork, , Ireland
MICGP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    Box 1. The seven subsections of the online questionnaire
    1. Candidate demographics

    2. Perception of clinical competency test attributes

    3. Attitude toward clinical competency test environment and exam set-up

    4. Attitude toward performance quality

    5. Perception of educational impact

    6. Perceived reliability and validity

    7. General comments

    • View popup
    Box 2. Themes from focus groups with supporting quotes
    ThemeSupporting quotes (focus group number, participant number)
    Fairness and relevance of the exam ‘So yeah, I thought it was all very fair and representative of real life, yeah.' (FG1,P5)
    ‘It is basically examining you on a morning surgery ... ’ (FG2, P2)
    'I think just working every day is good experience in itself, you know ... ' (FG1, P3)
    ' ... it was realistic ... and you know it was fair.' (FG1, GP2)
    Exam preparation ‘You learn from people you study with too, you pick up on things, on how they consult, which is nice.’ (FG2, P3)
    ' ... on the day having practiced to time and having practiced the role-plays as much as possible, after the first two or three patients I felt personally the nerves went and you kind of just got in to it because you are used to doing it ... ' (FG2, P2)
    ' ... practicing with each other in groups is better than one to one with your trainer because they are out of training and they wouldn’t have done the exams for a few years whereas we are in the zone, so to speak ... ' (FG1, GP5)
    Organisation of the exam ‘It was like clockwork it was very well run. They did a very good job ... ’ (FG2, P1)
    ' ... the buzzers going and everyone like a military, out and in.' (FG1, P1)
    ' ... really really well timed, it was really organised when I found it, like, it all ran perfectly ... ' (FG1, P5)
    Examiners 'I thought they were very discreet, I barely noticed them … They were like ghosts just coming in and out and I think that just allowed us to focus on the task at hand ... ’ (FG1, P2)
    'I barely noticed them ... ' (FG1, P3)
    '[The examiners were] totally just stone-faced' (FG2, P3)
    Actors ‘You genuinely would just think that they were just patients sitting in front of you and then after two or three you just get in to that and accepted that they were who they said they were.’ (FG1, P2)
    'They were really good at their role.' (FG1, P3)
    Exam expense 'You can see where the money went there ... ’ (FG1, P3)
    'I think it is outrageous that we don’t get fully refunded, that a good chunk of it has to come from our own pocket’ (FG1, P1)
    Clinical impact 'Afterwards, even though I was nervous about the result, I felt like I was better for doing the exam ... ’ (FG2, P3)
    'It’s like your driving test, isn’t it? Some habits stay, but I definitely have kept on some of it yeah.' (FG1, P2)
    Feedback 'It would have been nice to see how you had performed with this. I think it would have been nice to get some feedback. Passes are very helpful but it doesn’t tell you how well you did really.' (FG1, P5)
    'You know other exams that you do, you tend to bury and forget afterwards but of all the exams I have done this one, I would have loved to have known. You just get this big blank page of “pass” and that’s great and you are delighted that you passed, but you would love to know how you did in the different stations. Of all the exams we do this is literally what we are doing day to day for the rest of our lives.' (FG1, P2)
    'When we got the results it would have been nice to know what your mark was and just a little comment about how you did. It should just be a bit more transparent. Like, I presume they give feedback if somebody fails it. If you work hard at something, you know, you’d like to know how you did or how you could improve ... ' (FG2, P3)
    • View popup
    Table 1. Candidate demographics
    VariableFrequency, n (%)
    SexFemale
    Male
    60 (72)
    23 (28)
    Age, years25
    26–30
    31–35
    36–40
    41–45
    46–50
    1 (1)
    36 (43)
    28 (34)
    11 (13)
    5 (6)
    2 (2)
    Location in which undergraduate medial training completedIreland
    UK
    Hungary
    Latvia
    Poland
    Pakistan
    Not specified
    72 (87)
    5 (6)
    1 (1)
    1 (1)
    1 (1)
    1 (1)
    2 (2)
    English as a first languageYes
    No
    78 (94)
    5 (6)
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3
October 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The candidate perspective of the clinical competency test (CCT) of the MICGP examination: a mixed-methods study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The candidate perspective of the clinical competency test (CCT) of the MICGP examination: a mixed-methods study
Tony Foley, Kathleen McLoughlin, Elaine K Walsh, Paul Leggett, Muríosa O'Reilly, Molly Owens, Aisling A Jennings
BJGP Open 2018; 2 (3): bjgpopen18X101605. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen18X101605

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The candidate perspective of the clinical competency test (CCT) of the MICGP examination: a mixed-methods study
Tony Foley, Kathleen McLoughlin, Elaine K Walsh, Paul Leggett, Muríosa O'Reilly, Molly Owens, Aisling A Jennings
BJGP Open 2018; 2 (3): bjgpopen18X101605. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen18X101605
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • General Practice
  • family practice
  • Education
  • training
  • assessment
  • clinical competency
  • Postgraduate education

More in this TOC Section

  • Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and treatment intensity in secondary prevention of patients with ischaemic heart disease in the primary care setting: a real-world data registry study
  • “We’re all in the same boat… some of us just have more holes in their boat”: a qualitative interview study primary care staff views of Deep End Cymru
  • General practitioner characteristics and video use in out-of-hours primary care: a register-based study
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2025 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795