Background SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody measurements can be used to estimate the proportion of a population exposed or infected and may be informative about the risk of future infection. Previous estimates of the duration of antibody responses vary. Methods We present 6 months of data from a longitudinal seroprevalence study of 3276 UK healthcare workers (HCWs). Serial measurements of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid and anti-spike IgG were obtained. Interval censored survival analysis was used to investigate the duration of detectable responses. Additionally, Bayesian mixed linear models were used to investigate anti-nucleocapsid waning. Results Anti-spike IgG levels remained stably detected after a positive result, e.g., in 94% (95% credibility interval, CrI, 91-96%) of HCWs at 180 days. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG levels rose to a peak at 24 (95% credibility interval, CrI 19-31) days post first PCR-positive test, before beginning to fall. Considering 452 anti-nucleocapsid seropositive HCWs over a median of 121 days from their maximum positive IgG titre, the mean estimated antibody half-life was 85 (95%CrI, 81-90) days. Higher maximum observed anti-nucleocapsid titres were associated with longer estimated antibody half-lives. Increasing age, Asian ethnicity and prior self-reported symptoms were independently associated with higher maximum anti-nucleocapsid levels and increasing age and a positive PCR test undertaken for symptoms with longer anti-nucleocapsid half-lives. Conclusion SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies wane within months, and faster in younger adults and those without symptoms. However, anti-spike IgG remains stably detected. Ongoing longitudinal studies are required to track the long-term duration of antibody levels and their association with immunity to SARS-CoV-2 reinfection.

BackgroundThe goal of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in Competency-based Medical Education (CBME) is to establish a minimal level of competence. The purpose of this study was to 1) to determine the credibility and acceptability of the modified Angoff method of standard setting in the setting of CBME, using the Borderline Group (BG) method and the Borderline Regression (BLR) method as a reference standard; 2) to determine if it is feasible to set different standards for junior and senior residents, and 3) to determine the desired characteristics of the judges applying the modified Angoff method.MethodsThe results of a previous OSCE study (21 junior residents, 18 senior residents, and six fellows) were used. Three groups of judges performed the modified Angoff method for both junior and senior residents: 1) sports medicine surgeons, 2) non-sports medicine orthopedic surgeons, and 3) sports fellows. Judges defined a borderline resident as a resident performing at a level between competent and a novice at each station. For each checklist item, the judges answered yes or no for “will the borderline/advanced beginner examinee respond correctly to this item?” The pass mark was calculated by averaging the scores. This pass mark was compared to that created using both the BG and the BLR methods.ResultsA paired t-test showed that all examiner groups expected senior residents to get significantly higher percentage of checklist items correct compared to junior residents (all stations p < 0.001). There were no significant differences due to judge type. For senior residents, there were no significant differences between the cut scores determined by the modified Angoff method and the BG/BLR method. For junior residents, the cut scores determined by the modified Angoff method were lower than the cut scores determined by the BG/BLR Method (all p < 0.01).ConclusionThe results of this study show that the modified Angoff method is an acceptable method of setting different pass marks for senior and junior residents. The use of this method enables both senior and junior residents to sit the same OSCE, preferable in the regular assessment environment of CBME.

This study revealed the gaps between the forms of capital valued in medical education and those accessible to FiF students. Admitting more students from diverse backgrounds is only one part of the solution; widening participation strategies need to address challenges for FiF students during medical school and should enable students to retain, rather than subdue, their existing, diverse forms of social and cultural capital. Embracing the diversity sought in admissions is likely to benefit student learning, as well as the communities graduates will serve. Change must ideally go beyond medical programmes to address medical culture itself.

As a field, health professions education (HPE) has begun to answer calls to draw on social sciences and humanities (SS&H) knowledge and approaches for curricular content, design, and pedagogy. Two commonly used SS&H concepts in HPE are critical reflection and critical reflexivity. But these are often conflated, misunderstood, and misapplied. Improved clarity of these concepts may positively affect both the education and practice of health professionals. Thus, the authors seek to clarify the origins of each, identify the similarities and differences between them, and delineate the types of teaching and assessment methods that fit with critical reflection and/or critical reflexivity. Common to both concepts is an ultimate goal of social improvement. Key differences include the material emphasis of critical reflection and the discursive emphasis of critical reflexivity. These similarities and differences result in some different and some similar teaching and assessment approaches, which are highlighted through examples. The authors stress that all scientific and social scientific concepts and methods imported into HPE must be subject to continued scrutiny both from within their originating disciplines and in HPE. This continued questioning is core to the ongoing development of the HPE field and also to health professionals’ thinking and practice.

The study outcomes indicate, in line with international literature, that while proud of supporting patients, many pharmacists feel demoralised, torn between pressing public and professional demands and the expectations of advice-giving in unfamiliar, formal situations within nondescript, corporate workspaces.

Objectives The aim of this study was to develop a ranked thematic list encompassing the positive and negative exemplars of patient‐centred professionalism in community pharmacy. Methods An adapted Nominal Group Work (NGW) method was used in six individual consultation workshops (two with established pharmacists, one with newly qualified pharmacists, one with pharmacy staff, one with stakeholders and one with members of the public) followed by a mixed‐group forum event. Key findings Each of the six workshops resulted in the production of approximately 10 positive and 10 negative exemplars of patient‐centred professionalism. The thematization of these exemplars allowed the development of 11 broad themes. The mixed‐group forum event then provided a mechanism for ranking the importance of these themes. Safety, professional characteristics and relationships with patients were ranked as the most important themes by our study participants.

Medical Education 2010: 44: 1069–1076 Objectives  In 2006, the United Kingdom Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT) was introduced as a new medical school admissions tool. The aim of this cohort study was to determine whether the UKCAT has made any improvements to the way medical students are selected. Methods  Regression analysis was performed in order to study the ability of previous school type and gender to predict UKCAT, personal statement or interview scores in two cohorts of accepted students. The ability of admissions scores and demographic data to predict performance on knowledge and skills examinations was also studied. Results  Previous school type was not a significant predictor of either interview or UKCAT scores amongst students who had been accepted onto the programme (n = 307). However, it was a significant predictor of personal statement score, with students from independent and grammar schools performing better than students from state‐maintained schools. Previous school type, personal statements and interviews were not significant predictors of knowledge examination performance. UKCAT scores were significant predictors of knowledge examination performance for all but one examination administered in the first 2 years of medical school. Admissions data explained very little about performance on skills (objective structured clinical examinations [OSCEs]) assessments. Conclusions  The use of personal statements as a basis for selection results in a bias towards students from independent and grammar schools. However, no evidence was found to suggest that students accepted from these schools perform any better than students from maintained schools on Year 1 and 2 medical school examinations. Previous school type did not predict interview or UKCAT scores of accepted students. UKCAT scores are predictive of Year 1 and 2 examination performance at this medical school, whereas interview scores are not. The results of this study challenge claims made by other authors that aptitude tests do not have a place in medical school selection in the UK.

Background Natural and vaccine-induced immunity will play a key role in controlling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 variants have the potential to evade natural and vaccine-induced immunity. Methods In a longitudinal cohort study of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Oxfordshire, UK, we investigated the protection from symptomatic and asymptomatic PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conferred by vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCOV-19) and prior infection (determined using anti-spike antibody status), using Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, temporal changes in incidence and role. We estimated protection conferred after one versus two vaccinations and from infections with the B.1.1.7 variant identified using whole genome sequencing. Results 13,109 HCWs participated; 8285 received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (1407 two doses) and 2738 the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (49 two doses). Compared to unvaccinated seronegative HCWs, natural immunity and two vaccination doses provided similar protection against symptomatic infection: no HCW vaccinated twice had symptomatic infection, and incidence was 98% lower in seropositive HCWs (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.02 [95%CI &lt;0.01-0.18]). Two vaccine doses or seropositivity reduced the incidence of any PCR-positive result with or without symptoms by 90% (0.10 [0.02-0.38]) and 85% (0.15 [0.08-0.26]) respectively. Single-dose vaccination reduced the incidence of symptomatic infection by 67% (0.33 [0.21-0.52]) and any PCR-positive result by 64% (0.36 [0.26-0.50]). There was no evidence of differences in immunity induced by natural infection and vaccination for infections with S-gene target failure and B.1.1.7. Conclusion Natural infection resulting in detectable anti-spike antibodies and two vaccine doses both provide robust protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, including against the B.1.1.7 variant.