Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2006;333:601 (16 September), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7568.601
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORThe editorial by Aronson et al raises important concerns about the preparedness of newly qualified doctors to prescribe safely and effectively, but fails to provide evidence to support the claims that are made.1 Importantly, the authors assume that the number of curricular hours equates to learning. The General Medical Council issues and regularly updates requirements for the content and outcomes of undergraduate medical education and the first foundation year. We deliberately do not tell medical schools how many hours must be spent on a particular subject: it is the acquisition of our learning objectives that is important.
Medical education is a continuum. With respect to prescribing, as with so many other areas of medical education, we expect principles to be learnt and understood at medical school and then put into practice, under supervision, during the F1 year. Our requirements are laid out clearly in Tomorrow's Doctors and The
Peter Rubin, chairman
Education Committee, General Medical Council, London NW1 3JN peter.rubin@nottingham.ac.uk