Recipient

Medical Schools Council

First report 8 Oct 2024•Latest report 8 Oct 2024

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Other public bodies · Education sector body. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports: 1
Published responses: 100%
Concerns addressed: 1
Stated actions: 1

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

100%published responses found

1stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Medical Schools Council linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

8 Oct2024
Devon, Plymouth and Torbay
Concerns raised4
1. Extremely limited doctor training on ME/CFS treatment, especially severe ME
2. Lack of specialist healthcare provision for patients with severe ME
3. Failure of NICE guidance to provide detailed guidance on managing severe ME at home or in the community
1. Lack of current funding for ME/CFS treatment research and understanding of causes
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 1
1. Action
  Share the NHS England e-learning package on ME with medical schools.
  Stated completed
Respondent positions 4
1. Position
  The Medical Schools Council cannot compel medical schools to change curricula or require particular content to be delivered.
  Outside remit
1. Position
  Postgraduate medical education and training are outside the Medical Schools Council’s responsibility.
  Outside remit
2. Position
  The GMC regulates and quality assures undergraduate medical education, including the relevant curriculum standards.
  Redirects responsibility
3. Position
  The GMC regulates postgraduate training, while medical Royal Colleges develop specialty and general practice curricula and assess specialist knowledge.
  Redirects responsibility
AI-generated summary

Maeve Boothby O’Neill · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Maeve Boothby O’Neill, who had severe ME and was bedbound, died at home on 3 October 2021 after three hospital admissions during 2021. The report identified concerns about the lack of specialist care provision for severe ME, limited research funding and medical training, and insufficient guidance on managing severe ME in the home or community, including nutritional support.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Medical Schools Council; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Extremely limited doctor training on ME/CFS treatment, especially severe ME
Wider context from the report
“(3) During the course of the inquest it became clear that there was extremely limited training for Doctors on ME/ CFS and how to treat it – especially in relation to severe ME. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Medical Schools Council; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of specialist healthcare provision for patients with severe ME
Wider context from the report
“(1) During the course of the evidence it became clear that there were no specialist hospitals or hospices, beds, wards or other health care provision in England for patients with severe Myalgic encephalopathies (ME). This meant that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital had no commissioned service to treat Maeve and patients like her. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Medical Schools Council; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure of NICE guidance to provide detailed guidance on managing severe ME at home or in the community
Wider context from the report
“(4 ) During the course of the inquest it became clear that the 2021 NICE guidelines on ME did not provide any detailed guidance at all on how severe ME should be managed at home or in the community and in particular whether or not there is any necessary adaptation needed to the 2017 guidance on Nutrition support for adults : oral nutrition support , enteral tube feeding and parenteral nutrition . ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Medical Schools Council; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of current funding for ME/CFS treatment research and understanding of causes
Wider context from the report
“(2) During the course of the inquest it became clear that there was no current available funding for the research and development of treatment and further learning for understanding the causes of ME / Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). ”
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Share the NHS England e-learning package on ME with medical schools.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Additionally, the Department for Health and Social Care shared their response to this section 28 request with me and I can confirm that I have shared NHS England e-learning package on ME with medical schools.”

Source location
Response from MSC
Page 2 · response
Published 8 October 2024
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
The Medical Schools Council cannot compel medical schools to change curricula or require particular content to be delivered.

Verbatim wording from the response
“MSC is the membership body for medical schools in the UK and as such it has no power to compel medical schools to change curricula or require that content be delivered in a certain way. The General Medical Council (GMC) is the regulator of undergraduate medical education and is responsible for quality assuring medical schools. However, I have looked into how ME/CFS is taught and assessed across medical schools, and I have some information that I hope you will find reassuring.”

Source location
Response from MSC
Page 1 · response
Published 8 October 2024
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Postgraduate medical education and training are outside the Medical Schools Council’s responsibility.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I would like to finish by stressing that medical school is the first step of a long process of education and training that doctors in the UK undertake. It is important that lessons learnt in undergraduate medical education are built on when a doctor enters postgraduate medical education and training. MSC is not responsible for these stages of training which are regulated by the GMC. The curricula for specialty and GP training are developed by medical Royal Colleges who are also responsible for the assessment of specialist knowledge. In order that Royal Colleges and GMC are aware of this case I am copying in Professor ████████, Director of Education and Standards at GMC and ████████, Director of Education and Quality at the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges.”

Source location
Response from MSC
Page 2 · response
Published 8 October 2024
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
The GMC regulates and quality assures undergraduate medical education, including the relevant curriculum standards.

Verbatim wording from the response
“MSC is the membership body for medical schools in the UK and as such it has no power to compel medical schools to change curricula or require that content be delivered in a certain way. The General Medical Council (GMC) is the regulator of undergraduate medical education and is responsible for quality assuring medical schools. However, I have looked into how ME/CFS is taught and assessed across medical schools, and I have some information that I hope you will find reassuring.”

Source location
Response from MSC
Page 1 · response
Published 8 October 2024
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
The GMC regulates postgraduate training, while medical Royal Colleges develop specialty and general practice curricula and assess specialist knowledge.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I would like to finish by stressing that medical school is the first step of a long process of education and training that doctors in the UK undertake. It is important that lessons learnt in undergraduate medical education are built on when a doctor enters postgraduate medical education and training. MSC is not responsible for these stages of training which are regulated by the GMC. The curricula for specialty and GP training are developed by medical Royal Colleges who are also responsible for the assessment of specialist knowledge. In order that Royal Colleges and GMC are aware of this case I am copying in Professor ████████, Director of Education and Standards at GMC and ████████, Director of Education and Quality at the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges.”

Source location
Response from MSC
Page 2 · response
Published 8 October 2024
Open published response

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Concerns raised4

Extremely limited doctor training on ME/CFS treatment, especially severe ME

Lack of specialist healthcare provision for patients with severe ME

Failure of NICE guidance to provide detailed guidance on managing severe ME at home or in the community

Lack of current funding for ME/CFS treatment research and understanding of causes

Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1

Respondent positions A position is what this recipient says about the concern when it does not describe a specific action.4

Actions described in response 1

Respondent positions 4