Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 25, 2026
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Revalidation for general practitioners: randomised comparison of two revalidation models
David Bruce1, Katie Phillips, Ross Reid
1NHS Education for Scotland, Tayside Centre for General Practice, Dundee DD2 4AD. d.bruce@tcgp.dundee.ac.uk
Objective:
To compare two models of revalidation for general practitioners.
Design:
Randomised comparison of two revalidation models.
Setting:
Primary care in Tayside, Scotland.
Participants:
66 Tayside general practitioners (principals and non-principals), 53 of whom completed the revalidation folders. Interventions Two revalidation models: a minimum criterion based model with revalidation as the primary purpose, and an educational outcome model with emphasis on combining revalidation with continuing professional development.
Main Outcome Measures:
Feasibility and acceptability of each approach and effect on the doctor's continuing professional development. The ability to make a summative judgment on completed models and whether either model would allow patient groups to have confidence in the revalidation process.
Results:
The criterion model was preferred by general practitioners. For both models doctors reported making changes to their practice and felt a positive effect on their continuing professional development. Summative assessment of the folders showed reasonable inter-rater reliability.
Conclusions:
The criterion model provides a practical and acceptable model for general practitioners to use when preparing for revalidation.
