Recommendations and tips for passing the key feature problem examination.

The Key Feature Problem (KFP), is part of the Conjoint MAFP/FRACGP exit examination for Family Medicine specialisation in Malaysia. KFP tests candidates' skills in clinical reasoning and decision making. Over the years, KFP has been the cause of most of the failures in the Part 1 theory examination. This paper aims to highlight common errors committed by candidates and provide recommendations and practical examination technique tips on how to mitigate these errors. A summary of the 26 KFP cases used in the 2020 Conjoint KFP examination demonstrates the breadth and types of cases. From the feedback reports collated from eight assessors involved in this exam, we determined that although inadequate knowledge is probably the main contributor to failure, other easily correctible mistakes made by candidates further aggravate the situation. Common errors include offering more answers than requested, giving duplicate or incomplete answers, and writing answers out of context to the case scenario. The paper concludes with recommendations and sources for effective learning, and provides 12 examination technique tips. The tips include time management, reading carefully through the case, and checking that the answers are congruent with the questions asked.

The use of text messaging to improve attendance in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-attendance is common in primary care and previous studies have reported that reminders were useful in reducing broken appointments. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a text messaging reminder in improving attendance in primary care. DESIGN: Multicentre three-arm randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Seven primary care clinics in Malaysia. Participants. Patients (or their caregivers) who required follow-up at the clinics between 48 hours and 3 months from the recruitment date. Interventions. Two intervention arms consisted of text messaging and mobile phone reminders 24-48 hours prior to scheduled appointments. Control group did not receive any intervention. Outcome measures. Attendance rates and costs of interventions. RESULTS: A total of 993 participants were eligible for analysis. Attendance rates of control, text messaging and mobile phone reminder groups were 48.1, 59.0 and 59.6%, respectively. The attendance rate of the text messaging reminder group was significantly higher compared with that of the control group (odds ratio 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 2.17, P = 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in attendance rates between text messaging and mobile phone reminder groups. The cost of text messaging reminder (RM 0.45 per attendance) was lower than mobile phone reminder (RM 0.82 per attendance). CONCLUSIONS: Text messaging reminder system was effective in improving attendance rate in primary care. It was more cost-effective compared with the mobile phone reminder.