SRS08 - Who assesses matters: diversity gaps between surgical trainees and ARCP panels

Abstract Background Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) panels make high-stakes decisions on trainee progression, yet their demographic composition has not been studied nationally. We compared demographics of UK surgical trainees with ARCP panel members and assessed whether underrepresented groups are equitably represented among assessors. Methods A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of anonymised JCST data (2024–2025) included all trainees and consultant surgeons listed as ARCP panel members. Multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (c.i.) for panel membership by gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. A sensitivity analysis compared ARCP consultants with non-panel consultants. Results 9848 trainees and 2667 ARCP panel members were analysed. Male representation was higher among panel members (68.1%) than trainees (55.3%), while women were underrepresented (20.5 versus 35.4%). White surgeons were overrepresented on panels (51.5 versus 39.2%), while Asian (aOR = 0.62, 95% c.i. 0.54–0.70), black (aOR = 0.23, 95% c.i. 0.16–0.33), mixed (aOR = 0.47, 95% c.i. 0.34–0.64), and other/Chinese (aOR = 0.36, 95% c.i. 0.30–0.44) surgeons had lower odds of membership. LGBTQ+ surgeons were also underrepresented (aOR = 0.34, 95% c.i. 0.23–0.48). In consultant-only models, gender and most ethnicity gaps attenuated, but underrepresentation persisted for other/Chinese consultants (aOR = 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.47–0.75). Conclusions ARCP panels remain less diverse than the trainee population, particularly by gender, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. These gaps reflect both pipeline effects and assessor selection. Reforming panel composition, alongside mandatory equity and bias training, represents a modifiable step toward equitable surgical training.