Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec;73(12):992-998.
doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.09.005. Epub 2018 Oct 12.

The Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) examination: a review of the evidence

Affiliations

The Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) examination: a review of the evidence

T C Booth et al. Clin Radiol. 2018 Dec.

Abstract

The Fellowship of the Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) examination is the professional qualification that is essential for career progression in clinical radiology within the UK. It is also important for career progression in many countries internationally. The FRCR has evolved and changed over the last decade. In this systematic review we appraise and summarise the available data relating to the FRCR emphasising the published evidence regarding the validity, reliability, and acceptability of this examination. Comparison is made to other equivalent medical examinations, as well as a more recently published commissioned external review of the FRCR examinations. The Clinical Radiology Part 2B (CR2B) examination in its pre-existing format is reliable, valid, and acceptable. Recommendations from the commissioned external review are based primarily on expert opinion, with a limited evidence base comprising data from a small sample acquired during a single examination sitting and without peer review. Unlike the CR2B examination, there is little evidence regarding assessment of the CR1 and CR2 examinations. Both the CR1 and CR2 examinations are currently in the process of undergoing major changes to their formats. Blueprinting items to the curriculum might improve acceptability. Other changes may improve transparency and reliability of these assessments. Our analysis and many aspects of the external review may provide pointers regarding how the upcoming data produced by the "automated" FRCR examinations can be further analysed to provide a more robust evaluation.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Yeung A., Booth T.C., Jacob K. The FRCR 2B examination: a survey of candidate perceptions and experiences. Clin Radiol. 2011 May;66(5):412–419. PubMed PMID: 21316040. - PubMed
    1. Yeung A., Booth T.C., Larkin T.J. The FRCR 2B oral examination: is it reliable? Clin Radiol. 2013 May;68(5):466–471. PubMed PMID: 23245273. - PubMed
    1. Hawtin K.E., Williams H.R., McKnight L. Performance in the FRCR (UK)Part 2B examination: analysis of factors associated with success. Clin Radiol. 2014 Jul;69(7):750–757. PubMed PMID: 24854028. - PubMed
    1. Royal College of Radiologists . 2014. FRCR examinations review.https://www.rcr.ac.uk/clinical-radiology/examinations/examination-polici... Available at:
    1. Gov.uk . (IRMER) - Publications - GOV.UK; 2012. Ionising radiation (medical exposure) regulations 2000.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-ionising-radiation-medica... Available at:

Publication types