Academic Foundation Programme Research Articles

Differential Attainment Within the Specialised Foundation Programme: Creating an Accessible Mentorship Scheme to Increase Diversity Within Academic Medicine.

The Specialised Foundation Programme (SFP), formerly the Academic Foundation Programme, is a highly competitive pathway into academic medicine. There is minimal information available on the demographics of those who apply to the programme, how it scores its applicants and who is successful, making it difficult to assess whether the application process is accessible to all students and promotes a diverse workforce. There are varying levels of support available with coaching, either geographically ring-fenced by universities or available through paid courses. As a result, there is a risk of differential attainment between students who have financial constraints or attend universities where the SFP is less promoted. The aim of the study was to assess student opinion on barriers to the SFP and academic medicine and the demand for the creation of a national, free-to-access SFP mentorship programme to reduce differential attainment amongst student cohorts.Students in the programme received mentorship, peer learning and scheduled teaching events over a six-month period. Surveys were distributed pre- and post-course, and qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted. Of the respondents,76% felt that medical schools provided insufficient information on SFP, 31% did not feel financially stable at university and 53% stated that they would not enrol if a cost was present. Applicants were tested on pre- and post-course confidence, all of which showed an increase in mean Likert (1-5) scoring post-mentorship. Financial, institutional and geographical barriers to students applying to the programme were identified. Whilst further research is required to better understand the barriers to academic medicine, national, free-to-access mentorship may effectively reduce differential attainment and improve accessibility amongst students.

Challenges of First-Year Extended Curriculum Programme Students at a University in South Africa

The Extended Curriculum Programme (ECP) is an academic foundation programme established and supported by South Africa’s Department of Higher Education and Training as a route and an enabling environment for educationally disadvantaged, underprepared, unprepared, and at-risk students to access and succeed in higher education. However, beyond the academic concerns for students enrolled on this programme, there are social issues that could hinder the success of the enrolled students. This study examines the challenges of students enrolled in Extended Curriculum Programme in a selected university in South Africa. Using a qualitative research method, data was collected following a focus group discussion comprising twelve groups in the Faculty of Management and Commerce ECP first-year students. This study found that students face a number of challenges including information asymmetry, mismatch between high school subjects and university courses, transitioning from high school to university setting, inadequate and unequal academic support, and stigmatization. The findings imply a need for guidance and counselling in the choice of a future career at high school level, an awareness about ECP, and strengthened support beyond academic support by improving social integration and boosting ECP students’ self-confidence. Government and institutions need to introduce educational anti-stigma interventions to correct individuals’ and society’s misinformed perceptions about ECP programmes and to promote awareness about the potential and possibilities of the programme.

A webinar series to educate applicants about the UK academic foundation programme: a longitudinal cross-sectional study

BackgroundThe UK academic foundation programme (AFP) is a competitive programme for medical graduates and forms the initial stage of the integrated clinical academic pathway. The application is complex and targeted education is beneficial. As online technologies improve, virtual medical education is becoming more common. Currently, webinar education, particularly that of webinar series, are poorly evidenced. An online course was created to investigate the acceptability and effectiveness of webinars for medical education.MethodsA six-part, one-hour sessional webinar course was developed following a focus group with academic foundation doctors. A pre- and post-course cross-sectional questionnaire study evaluated participant demographics, webinar opinion and self-rated understanding of the AFP via Google Form (Google, USA). Where applicable a five-point Likert scale (1-Strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree) was utilised and analysis using non-parametric paired statistical analysis.ResultsMedical students (n=303) from 35 UK universities completed the pre-course questionnaire. Most students had not received targeted education on the AFP. They rated webinars useful for education (mean=4.2 s.d. 0.7).After the course, participants (n=66) expressed it was significantly convenient (mean=4.7), effective (mean=4.7) and suitably interactive (mean=4.4) (p<0.001 compared to neutral). Participants preferred short sessions over multiple days to the concept of a full-day event (mean=4.6 vs 3.1, p<0.001).Paired analysis of participants completing both forms (n=47) demonstrates a significant increase in self-rated understanding of AFP content, portfolio building, application process, acute clinical scenarios, interview technique and overall confidence in acquiring an AFP post (p<0.001).Follow-up identified 43 participants who completed the course were successful in their AFP application. This represents 7.8% of all successful AFP applicants in 2021.ConclusionsThis study evidences an accessible and effective webinar series for AFP education. Comprehensive webinar courses for similar topics and demographics may provide valuable utility in the provision of future medical education.Trial registrationEthics requirements were waived for this study by Bristol University Ethics Committee. All participants in this study consented for anonymous use of their data. As such the trial is not registered.

Examination of national survey data regarding academic foundation training during the COVID-19 pandemic second wave

We aimed to examine the effect of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on Academic Foundation Programme (AFP) trainees. A voluntary, anonymous questionnaire was circulated to all UK AFP doctors. Data were collected from February 2021 to April 2021 then analysed. Of a possible 1,096 trainees, 149 responded to the survey: 48% of respondents were at least partially redeployed, 31% lost academic time and 47% had projects cancelled or postponed. In free-text responses, despite some research opportunities, frustration at lost research time and opportunities were common themes. Trainees also highlighted communication and wellbeing issues. These results demonstrate that the overall effect of COVID-19 on this cohort cannot be underestimated. We propose that a series of measures are implemented to protect and support academic trainees. We hope that these measures would encourage high-quality academic output and help secure the development of the academic clinical workforce.

Widening access to the specialised foundation programme.

The specialised foundation programme, previously known as the academic foundation programme, is an alternate foundation training pathway for doctors that are interested in research, medical education and leadership. The programme is highly competitive, with competition ratios rising to 1:5 in some units of application. A series of courses is held each year out of goodwill to assist students with the application process, but little has been published with respect to evidence-based approaches to both the application process and interviews. This article provides a series of frameworks to simplify the challenges posed by the application process and the academic, personal and clinical interviews.

835 Evaluation of an International Virtual Teaching Series for UK Academic Foundation Programme Applications and Interviews: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract Background UK academic foundation programme (AFP) is an important steppingstone into academic surgical training, but there is paucity in undergraduate preparedness. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a virtual webinar series to prepare students for applications and interviews. Method A cross-sectional study was conducted between 18/10/2020 – 19/12/2020. Ethical approval was not required as this was an evaluation of teaching interventions. Medical students interested in AFP were included. Three 1-hour presentations, delivered by two AFP doctors, focused on evidence-based frameworks to approach AFP applications, critical appraisal, personal and clinical interviews. Pre- and post-webinar electronic surveys compared preparedness in self-reported knowledge (SRK) and confidence (SRC) on a Likert scale (1: not knowledgeable/confident – 5: very knowledgeable/confident). SPSS v27.0 was used to perform Wilcoxon Signed-rank test; P-value&amp;lt;0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Mean attendance per presentation was 136, with 93(68.4%) pre-webinar responses and 62(45.6%) post-webinar responses. Both SRK and SRC regarding AFP applications improved by the same value (median 3 versus 4; p &amp;lt; 0.0001). Both SRK and SRC in critical appraisal also improved by the same value (median 2 versus 4; p &amp;lt; 0.0001). SRK and SRC in using interview answer frameworks (SPIES, STARR and CAMP) improved from median 2 versus 4 (p &amp;lt; 0.0001) and median 1 versus 4 (p &amp;lt; 0.0001), respectively. Across all pre-surveys, 129(46.4%) had no preference regarding teaching platforms, 115(41.3%) preferred webinars and 34(12.2%) preferred face-to-face teaching. Conclusions Webinars, teaching evidence-based frameworks can improve preparedness for AFP applications and interviews. Medical schools should address students’ perceived lack of knowledge and confidence in critical appraisal.

758 Online Surgical Journal Clubs: Are They Effective?

Abstract Aim Much of medical education has been abruptly forced online during the COVID-19 pandemic. Traditional journal clubs thrive on group interaction and debate. The aim of this project is to assess whether an online surgical journal club could replicate this experience and learning. Method A fortnightly, chat-based online surgical journal club with national reach was re-launched under SCALPEL (Manchester Medical School’s surgical society) with defined learning objectives, inclusion of studies from different surgical sub-specialities and a proforma to aid critical appraisal. Anonymous feedback forms were sent to participants to assess confidence in critically appraising the literature before and after attendance, and differences in means were analysed using paired t-test. Results 32 feedback forms from participants, the majority of whom were final year medical students (34.4%) were analysed. 28.1% had previously attended a journal club. 65.6% of attendees had prior involvement in a research project which led to a publication for 18.8%, while 59.4% were interested in applying for the Academic Foundation Programme (AFP). The self-reported confidence of participants to identify the study design, interpret the results and statistical analyses; and scrutinise the strengths and weaknesses of a study increased by 12.2%, 14.7% and 15.9% respectively (p = &amp;lt;0.001). Furthermore, 96.9% of attendees stated they would attend another online journal club in the future, with 59.4% favouring an online format. Conclusions Online surgical journal clubs are effective and are here to stay following the conclusion of social distancing. They have the advantage of further outreach and may encourage greater participation than traditional journal clubs.

Virtual Interview, Real Anxiety: Prospective Evaluation of a Focused Teaching Programme on Confidence Levels Among Medical Students Applying for Academic Clinical Posts.

BackgroundIn 2020, final year medical students applying for the United Kingdom’s competitive academic training posts face an additional challenge because interviews are conducted online rather than in-person. We assessed how this new format influences anxiety and the impact of a targeted course on candidates’ confidence levels.MethodsA mixed-methods national teaching programme including online bespoke mock interviews was delivered to prospective Academic Foundation Programme applicants. Pre- and post-interview questionnaires assessed anxiety levels subjectively and using a Measure of Anxiety in Selection Interviews (MASI) scores.ResultsIndividuals self-reported greater confidence, experience and preference for interviews delivered in-person as compared to online interviews. Post-course, there was an increase in self-reported confidence specific to online interviews (p = 0.009) and lower MASI scores in three of five domains, indicating reduced anxiety (social anxiety: p = 0.004, performance anxiety: p <0.001, behavioral anxiety: p = 0.003).ConclusionA structured course can increase confidence and reduce anxiety for online academic medicine interviews.

10 minutes with Professor Helen Stokes-Lampard

### Biography Dr Cian Wade, National Medical Director’s Clinical Fellow Clinical Fellow at the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges and NHS England/NHS Improvement Cian is a junior doctor working as...

Could the UK Foundation Programme training post allocation process result in regional variations in the knowledge and skills of Foundation doctors? A cross-sectional study.

Background and AimsThe allocation of medical school graduates to Foundation Schools (post‐qualification training, organized at regional level) in the United Kingdom uses a ranking process that takes into account educational performance at medical school and performance on a situational judgment test (SJT). We aimed to compare the performance of United Kingdom graduates allocated to different United Kingdom Foundation School according to three metrics: educational performance measure (EPM), SJT, and prescribing safety assessment (PSA).MethodsWe used a cross‐sectional study design using data from the UK Medical Education Database, studying 19 United Kingdom Foundation School groups. A total of 33 730 graduates from United Kingdom medical schools in the period 2014 to 2018 (inclusive) who started Foundation Training in August 2018 or earlier were included in the study, excluding those allocated to the Academic Foundation Programme or the Armed Forces Deanery. The outcomes were within‐year standardized mean scores (by Foundation School) on the EPM, SJT, and PSA.ResultsThere was a significant difference between Foundation Schools in the Educational Performance Measure (F = 401, P < .001), SJT (F = 213, P < .001), and PSA (F = 95, P < .001). Tukey‐Kramer pairwise comparisons between Foundation Schools showed a very high percentage of statistical significance (78%, 402/513 comparisons). The Cohen's d effect size for the difference in means and Tukey‐Kramer 95% confidence intervals between the Foundation Schools with the highest (North West Thames) and lowest (West Midlands North) means were 1.92 (1.77‐2.07) for the EPM, 1.59 (1.44‐1.73) for the SJT, and 0.94 (0.79‐1.09) for the PSA.ConclusionThere is a statistically significant difference between the knowledge and skills of doctors (as measured by the three metrics used in this study) entering the Foundation Programme in different Foundation Schools. It is less clear whether this has an impact on patient care and thus is unfair from the perspective of the patient.

Evaluating the usefulness and utility of a webinar as a platform to educate students on a UK clinical academic programme.

The Academic Foundation Programme (AFP) is the first step of the UK's national integrated clinical academic pathway; however, the application process can be unclear. We evaluated webinars as a teaching medium to enhance knowledge and confidence of prospective applicants. Medical students were invited to attend a free webinar. The webinar was designed by a former academic foundation trainee, outlining the UK integrated clinical academic pathway and how to apply to the AFP. An online questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted pre- and post-webinar. In total, 118 out of 199 (59.3% response rate) attendees filled out the pre-webinar questionnaire, while 64 out of 199 attendees (32.2% response rate) filled out the post-webinar questionnaire. Of these 83.1% had never previously attended a medical education webinar, and 92.3% agreed webinars offer flexibility and convenience, saving time and money on travel. Matched pre- and post-webinar data showed an increase in participants' knowledge (p< 0.0001) and confidence (p < 0.001). This study has demonstrated the utility of a focused webinar in enhancing medical students' knowledge and confidence in AFP applications. Webinars are a rarely utilised yet highly acceptable way to engage millennial students and could be used to enhance engagement with clinical academia.

Academic medicine: the continuing challenges.

Numbers of academic medicine trainees have been declining internationally. Many countries have taken differing approaches to improving recruitment, with some having established pathways. In the UK, the academic foundation programme (AFP) is one such pathway aimed towards those interested in an academic medical career. Variation exists amongst universities with respect to application and success rates. As a group of AFP doctors, we aimed to explore these issues. Numbers of academic medicine trainees have been declining internationally METHODS: We created and implemented a 1-day national course, comprising lectures and small group workshops, geared towards informing applicants about the AFP. It was evaluated via pre- and post-course questionnaires using a Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5. We created and implemented a 1-day national course, comprising lectures and small group workshops, geared towards informing applicants about the AFP RESULTS: A total of 150 attendees were present from 16 different medical schools; 95% (143/150) of the attendees filled in both questionnaires. Attendees appeared unaware of the stages involved in the application process and felt underprepared. Following the course, learners reported median scores (with interquartile limits) that demonstrated increased overall knowledge, from 2 (1) to 4 (1) (p<0.01), and increased preparedness, from 2 (1) to 3 (1) (p<0.01). Our findings indicate that recruitment remains challenging, even in countries with established pathways. In the UK, the awareness of these pathways appears to be poor and courses such as ours may remedy that. Further exploration into the most effective methods to increase recruitment is necessary. The effect of institutional disparities in research culture and impact on application success needs investigation. Perhaps medical schools should introduce students to the prospect of academic careers earlier in training. Globally, efforts still need to be concentrated largely towards establishing integrated pathways.

Trainee and supervisor experience of the Academic Foundation Programme.

The Academic Foundation Programme (AFP) is often the initial step along the Integrated Academic Training pathway in the UK. It is relatively new and research as to its effectiveness is limited. Our objective was to evaluate the AFP in terms of its impact on academic career aspirations and to explore trainees' expectations and experience of the programme and investigate the enablers and barriers to success. Seven supervisors of Academic Foundation trainees were interviewed over a 5-month period in 2014. AFP trainees' views were sought by way of an online questionnaire that covered six areas: demographics, expectations, academic time, experience, research and achievements. Thirty-four trainees completed online questionnaires. The majority of trainees (94%) did not proceed directly along the Integrated Academic Training pathway to complete Academic Clinical Fellowships, but those who applied to do so were often successful (nine applicants, six successful). Free-text comments revealed an expectation of a more course-like structure to the programme, this is in contrast to the authentic experience of clinical academia, along with its associated challenges, that some of the supervisors reported. The importance of planning and preparation for success was a recurring theme from the supervisor interviews. The programme is achieving some success in encouraging academic careers. There are several areas that can be improved. Improving the availability of information and guidance for supervisors and facilitating Academic Foundation Doctors to network are both feasible changes that could lead to improvement.

The UK Academic Foundation Programmes: are the objectives being met?

Fifty-six respondents completed the survey from 9 out of the 15 Academic Units of Application. Of these, 82% were undertaking a research based Academic Foundation Programme; however, 41% reported not having access to any training on research methods and governance. Sixty-six percent reported they were aware of the aims and expected outcomes of the Academic Foundation Programme, but the self-reported achievement of academic compendium outcomes was relatively low. Sixty-three percent rated the quality of their experience on the Academic Foundation Programme as excellent or good and 75% reported that they intended to continue in academia. Most trainees (64%) reported that the completion of a postgraduate qualification as part of their Academic Foundation Programme would improve the programme. Conclusion The Academic Foundation Programme plays a valuable role in trainees' development and preparing them for a career in academia. However, the objectives of the programme are currently not being uniformly achieved. Furthermore, trainees feel there remains room for improvement in the design of the programme.

The Scottish Academic Foundation Year Programme: what, why and how?

The Foundation Programme is well established in the UK and serves as the generic training scheme into which newly qualified doctors enter after gaining a medical degree. Although individual programmes have many differences, the range of competencies needing to be fulfilled to progress is uniform across Scotland and the rest of the UK. Some final year medical undergraduates may apply for the Academic Foundation Programme; this is designed to facilitate exposure to academic medicine over and above the clinical experience offered to Foundation Year doctors. This paper describes characteristics of the Academic Foundation Programme in general, with a particular focus on Scotland, which is one Foundation School.

How to apply for the academic foundation programme.

The UK Academic Foundation Programme (AFP) is a two-year foundation programme that includes an additional “academic theme” undertaking work in research, management/leadership, or education and teaching activities. The limited number of AFP places makes the AFP application a highly competitive process. This article outlines points to consider when applying for the AFP and successful application strategies. Reviewed by successful AFP applicants, this article provides specific insight into applications to the London Academic Unit of Application (deanery).

Peer review report 1 on “How to apply for the academic foundation programme”

Peer review report 1 on “How to apply for the academic foundation programme”

Peer review report 2 on “How to apply for the Academic Foundation Programme”

Peer review report 2 on “How to apply for the Academic Foundation Programme”

The academic foundation programme: a new foundation for academic medicine.

The academic foundation programme: a new foundation for academic medicine.

Effect of a national focused course on academic medicine for UK candidates applying for a Clinical Academic Programme.

Background Academic medicine is crucial for healthcare advancement. However, recruitment of junior doctors into academia remains an area of concern globally. In the UK, a national integrated clinical academic pathway was developed to address these issues, with the Academic Foundation Programme as the 'first opportunity for research'. We aimed to evaluate whether a focused course on academic medicine could enhance knowledge, confidence and preparedness of candidates wishing to apply for an academic programme. Methods UK medical students attended a national course conducted by current UK Academic Foundation Programme doctors that comprised lectures on academic medicine and various aspects of the Academic Foundation Programme. An online questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted with participants rating measures including knowledge, preparedness and confidence related to Academic Foundation Programme applications. Outcomes were measured using Likert scales (1=low; 5=high). Results In total, 103 out of 155 attendees from 11 different UK medical schools responded to the survey (66% response rate). Pre and post-course data showed increase in participants' knowledge (median score 2 vs 4, p < 0.0001), understanding of the application process (median score 2 vs 4, p < 0.0001), confidence (median score 2 vs 4, p < 0.0001) and preparedness (median score 2 vs 4, p < 0.0001) in applying for the Academic Foundation Programme. Conclusion To our knowledge this is the first study in the available literature that demonstrates a focused course on academic medicine may enhance UK medical students' knowledge, confidence and preparedness in applying for a clinical academic programme. Further research will ascertain whether such courses can augment trainee numbers undertaking and remaining within academic medicine.