The medical body responsible for training emergency doctors has been given the all-clear over claims made by a group of 'non-white' doctors its qualification test is racially-biased.
However, the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine has been asked to apologise to the group for “the unintended systemic racial discrimination” caused by a new testing process.
Earlier this year, the group complained that they were discriminated against after failing to pass the 2016 fellowship clinical examination to become emergency specialists.
They cited their own research which showed that 88 per cent of Caucasian candidates passed the test compared with only 6.8 per cent of 'non-white' candidates who passed.
The group said this affected “coloured, or not-white” candidates from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, South Korea and Bangladesh.
But an independent report commissioned to look into the claims said there were a range of factors which could be blamed, but there was no statistical evidence of bias that resulted in the disparity in the pass rates between the Caucasian and 'non-white' doctors.
Other than reports of the individuals’ own experiences, the report did not find any evidence of examiners conducting themselves in a racially-biased way, it said.
“The likely cause of the disparity in pass rates … cannot be attributed solely to systemic discrimination and unconscious bias,” it said.
But the report said while psychometric analysis of the bias of examiners did not have a “statistically identifiable effect” on the test, individual bias could not be ruled out completely.
For example, examiners scoring a candidates’ performance could be open to subjectivity and “conscious or unconscious bias”.
That could partly be blamed on a lack of diversity among the examiners, “which may disadvantage a culturally diverse candidate group,” the report said.
The report recommended an apology from the College for the “unintended systemic racial discrimination” associated with introduction of a revamped clinical testing structure in 2015.
Personal toll
Some of the complainants said they were wary of being stereotyped for behaviours such as being quietly spoken, which could be interpreted as not being confident about a medical decision.
The report also found candidates faced stress and depression because of the process, including due to the ongoing financial costs of having to pay each time they took the test, or taking time off work to study for the exam.
Australasian College for Emergency Medicine President Tony Lawler acknowledged the personal toll the procedure had taken on candidates.
“We recognise that some candidates have been deeply affected by their experience and apologise for the adverse impact it has had on their lives,” Professor Lawler said.
“We need to continue to act to rebuild trust and make sure our examination processes are fair, clearly explained and well understood.
The College had a duty to all patients to ensure specialists had the right skills to provide the best care, he added.
