To gather information about psychiatric trainees' use of different information sources and academic materials, a questionnaire was distributed at the London Deanery Annual Psychiatry Trainee Conference and the training programmes of two teaching trusts.

Participants returned 202 out of a total of 300 completed questionnaires (67%). Websites were the most commonly accessed information source ahead of textbooks, abstracts and journals. Year of training correlated positively with journal use and negatively with textbook use. Year of training also correlated positively with frequency of reading three journals published by the Royal College of Psychiatrists and with specific reasons for consulting journals, namely to improve clinical practice and inform trainees' own research.

Respondents reported consulting websites more frequently than more traditional information sources but journals are still a widely used source of information for trainee clinicians. It is important that trainees continue to be equipped with skills to identify and access high-quality information at the point of clinical uncertainty.

To identify training needs of the next generation of psychiatrists and barriers in prescribing first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs). We have surveyed psychiatry trainees in East Anglia with regard to their training experience, knowledge and attitudes to the use of oral FGAs as regular medication.

Two-thirds of trainees were aware that first- and second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) have similar efficacy, and a similar proportion perceived the older drugs to have more or ‘stronger’ side-effects. Lack of training experience was noted as the second leading concern for prescribing FGAs. A quarter of trainees received no training exposure to the older drugs and two-thirds had never initiated these drugs themselves. Although nearly 90% of trainees felt confident about initiating an oral SGA as a regular medication, only about 40% felt confident with FGAs (P<0.001).

The survey highlights worrying gaps in training. FGAs can be used effectively, minimising side-effects, by careful dose titration, avoiding antipsychotic polypharmacy, high-dose, and high-potency drugs, thus ensuring they are not lost to future generations of psychiatrists.

There is a drive to increase the number of psychiatry foundation placements to ensure that training keeps up with the changing health and social care landscape. This qualitative study aimed to explore, by interview, the experiences of 17 doctors who have completed a foundation placement in psychiatry.

The study highlights the benefits of foundation psychiatry placements and some of their positive and negative aspects.

Those developing foundation placements will need to ensure they are of high quality.

To establish an initial conceptualisation of how psychiatrists understand and use formulation within adult psychiatry practice. Twelve psychiatrists took part in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using a constructivist grounded theory methodology.

Formulation was conceptualised as an addition to diagnosis, triggered by risk, complexity and a need for an enhanced understanding. Participants valued collaborative formulation with psychologists. Multiple contextual factors were perceived to either facilitate or inhibit the process. Barriers to formulation led to a disjointed way of working.

Findings contribute to an understanding of formulation within psychiatry training and practice.

We used an online questionnaire to investigate medical students' perceptions of the apparent hierarchy between specialties, whether they have witnessed disparaging comments (‘badmouthing’ or ‘bashing’) against other specialists and whether this has had an effect on their career choice.

In total, 960 students from 13 medical schools completed the questionnaire; they ranked medical specialties according to the level of badmouthing and answered questions on their experience of specialty bashing. Psychiatry and general practice attracted the greatest number of negative comments, which were made by academic staff, doctors and students. Twenty-seven per cent of students had changed their career choice as a direct result of bashing and a further 25.5% stated they were more likely to change their specialty choice. Although 80.5% of students condemned badmouthing as unprofessional, 71.5% believed that it is a routine part of practising medicine.

Bashing of psychiatry represents another form of stigmatisation that needs to be challenged in medical schools. It not only has an impact on recruitment into the specialty, but also has the wider effect of stigmatising people with mental health disorders.