GMC's proposals for revalidation would not be accurate, economical, or fair

EDITOR—To anyone involved in assessing medical competence, the General Medical Council's proposal for revalidation is potentially unfair and inaccurate, and very expensive.1 The proposal has two parts. The first—annual appraisal—is uncontroversial; it can be helpful.2 The second is a summative assessment every five years, aggregating the appraisals, which is reviewed by two doctors from the appraisee's field and a lay person; collectively they determine whether to recommend revalidation. This does not lead to de-registration: it acts as a sieve, seeking to identify …