English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the period 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2020, 76 doctors whose names/entries had been erased from the UK Medical Register by a disciplinary tribunal applied for restoration, and 23 out of 76 (30.3%) applications granted. In 5 of the 53 of those refused restoration, the tribunal suspended indefinitely the right to make further applications. The most frequent reasons for refusal were failure to demonstrate insight (seen in 96%), failure to demonstrate remediation (seen in 79%), and failure to demonstrate that knowledge and skills were up to date (24.5%). Success was more common in UK graduate applications (14/29 - 48.3%) than non-UK graduate applications (9/37 - 24.3%), and in those legally represented (16/29 - 55.2%) than in those without legal representation (7/29 - 24.1%), but the data does not indicate the reasons for these differences. Disciplinary erasure need not necessarily be for life as doctors who learn from their experience, change their ways, and provide evidence of genuine insight and remediation along with up to date knowledge and skills can successfully be reinstated on the register.

The outcome of applications for restoration to the Medical Register following disciplinary erasure