The general practice specialist examination – examiners’ perspectives on the status quo and future development: An exploratory qualitative study

Background: The specialist examination has a substantial impact on the quality of healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to explore examiners’ perspectives on the current examination format, their motivation for serving as examiners, perceived strengths and weaknesses of the existing assessment, suggestions for improvement, and the perceived effects of Competence Centres for Postgraduate Training (CCPTs). Methods: Examiners from across Germany were recruited and interviewed in semi-structured video interviews using a self-developed interview guide. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: Twelve examiners from six federal states participated. The mean interview duration was 33 minutes (range: 24-57 minutes). Key advantages identified included the one-to-one examination setting, the ability to ensure a minimum standard of specialist competence and the examination's efficiency in terms of time and resources. Oral examinations were perceived as having limited ability to assess the complex clinical competencies required in patient care. Perceived needs for change varied among participants. Suggested improvements included examiner training, the development of shared assessment criteria and the introduction of practical examination components. Longitudinal assessments were also mentioned. Discussion: Examiners recognised limitations of the current examination regarding objectivity, reliability, validity and contextual sensitivity, particularly in relation to the complexity of general practice. Nevertheless, they considered the assessment of a minimum standard of specialist competence to be feasible. The findings reveal a tension between practical feasibility and educational assessment standards. Potential areas for improvement include examiner training, regular exchange among examiners, shared assessment frameworks, a clearer definition of examination objectives and the implementation of longitudinal assessment approaches (e.g. portfolio-based assessment with regular interim assessments). Conclusions: The specialist examination demonstrates considerable potential for further development. Shared assessment frameworks, as developed during examiner training, could provide greater structure to the examination process and may be implemented with relative ease.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
GMS journal for medical education
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001872
Primary Topic
Innovations in Medical Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

The general practice specialist examination – examiners’ perspectives on the status quo and future development: An exploratory qualitative study

Simon Schwill, Marco Roos, Attila Altiner, Christine Becker et al.
GMS journal for medical education
Innovations in Medical Education
article

The general practice specialist examination – examiners’ perspectives on the status quo and future development: An exploratory qualitative study

Simon Schwill, Marco Roos, Attila Altiner, Christine Becker, Andreas C. Dreher
article en

Abstract

Background: The specialist examination has a substantial impact on the quality of healthcare delivery. The aim of this study was to explore examiners’ perspectives on the current examination format, their motivation for serving as examiners, perceived strengths and weaknesses of the existing assessment, suggestions for improvement, and the perceived effects of Competence Centres for Postgraduate Training (CCPTs). Methods: Examiners from across Germany were recruited and interviewed in semi-structured video interviews using a self-developed interview guide. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: Twelve examiners from six federal states participated. The mean interview duration was 33 minutes (range: 24-57 minutes). Key advantages identified included the one-to-one examination setting, the ability to ensure a minimum standard of specialist competence and the examination's efficiency in terms of time and resources. Oral examinations were perceived as having limited ability to assess the complex clinical competencies required in patient care. Perceived needs for change varied among participants. Suggested improvements included examiner training, the development of shared assessment criteria and the introduction of practical examination components. Longitudinal assessments were also mentioned. Discussion: Examiners recognised limitations of the current examination regarding objectivity, reliability, validity and contextual sensitivity, particularly in relation to the complexity of general practice. Nevertheless, they considered the assessment of a minimum standard of specialist competence to be feasible. The findings reveal a tension between practical feasibility and educational assessment standards. Potential areas for improvement include examiner training, regular exchange among examiners, shared assessment frameworks, a clearer definition of examination objectives and the implementation of longitudinal assessment approaches (e.g. portfolio-based assessment with regular interim assessments). Conclusions: The specialist examination demonstrates considerable potential for further development. Shared assessment frameworks, as developed during examiner training, could provide greater structure to the examination process and may be implemented with relative ease.

GMS journal for medical education
University of Augsburg (DE), Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Innovations in Medical Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.