GMC decisions are fair to doctors under investigation says new report
Decisions made about doctors during a General Medical Council (GMC) investigation are fair and consistent according to independent research published by the GMC.
In 2014 the GMC commissioned researchers at Plymouth University to undertake a review of decision-making during its investigations into doctors who have been subject to a serious complaint.
The research looked at 187 randomly selected cases during different stages of a GMC investigation. It assessed the decisions made against the GMC’s published decision-making guidance, and evaluated the wording used in that guidance, as well as reviewing how the GMC presents allegations to doctors under investigation.
The review found that the decisions made in all 187 cases were appropriate as well as being in line with the guidance and criteria set out for GMC investigation teams.
Previous GMC research has found that some doctors are more at risk of receiving a complaint and having that complaint investigated. Risk factors that increase the chance of a doctor being involved in an investigation include their age, gender and specialty, as well as their place of qualification and ethnic background.
The Plymouth review found no evidence of direct or indirect bias or discrimination in the wording of GMC guidance that might account for the over-representation of some groups of doctors in fitness to practise procedures.
The research also identified some areas for improvement. As you can see this is as explained how online pokie games can be played where those free online pokies games are made using same method to work on the platforms. While all the decisions about a doctor’s case were appropriate, the researchers found that in some cases the regulator could have given more detailed reasoning for their decision.
The full report, ‘Review of decision making in the General Medical Council’s fitness to practise procedures’, is available to view on the GMC website at www.gmc-uk.org/about/research/26342.asp.
