Traditional Panel Interview versus Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) in Medical School Admissions: Does Performance differ by Age, Gender, Urban or Rural, or Socioeconomic Status (Findings from one medical school).

Wanda Parsons,Janet Mchugh,Yanqing Yi

doi:10.15694/mep.2018.0000272.1

Abstract

Globally, medical schools are trying to widen access and to increase the diversity of their student body to be more representative of the population and to meet the future heath care needs of society. Selection methods must not disadvantage the applicants from priority groups. In Memorial University's Faculty of Medicine, rural applicants and applicants from low socioeconomic status are priority groups. Methods: Since 2013, Memorial University has used a combination of traditional panel interviews and MMIs to interview candidates for medical school. We wondered whether applicants who participate in this medical school interview process perform differently on the MMIs compared to the traditional panel interview process and whether performance differs on either of the two interview processes based on age, sex, origin(urban or rural), or socioeconomic status. The mean score on the traditional panel interview was higher than that on the MMI. Females scored higher than males on both the traditional panel interview and the MMI. Applicants aged 22 and younger performed worse on both the traditional panel interview and the MMI than the other age groups. Neighborhood socioeconomic status, and urban/rural living status were not significantly related with applicants' performance on the traditional panel interview or MMI. The type of interview is not disadvantaging applicants from Memorial University's priority areas.

Highlights

Medical schools are trying to widen access and to increase the diversity of their student body to be more representative of the population and to meet the future heath care needs of society
To meet the health care needs of the province, the medical school is committed to the equitable selection of a diverse student body in three priority areas: Aboriginal peoples Students from rural and remote areas Economically disadvantaged students
Given Memorial’s need to avoid disadvantaging applicants from priority areas, and findings from previous research, the current study focuses on whether demographic variables, especially socioeconomic status (SES), and urban/rural origin affect performance on the TaMMI process

Summary

Introduction

Medical schools are trying to widen access and to increase the diversity of their student body to be more representative of the population and to meet the future heath care needs of society. Selection methods must not disadvantage the applicants from priority groups. In Memorial University’s Faculty of Medicine, rural applicants and applicants from low socioeconomic status are priority groups. To meet the health care needs of the province, the medical school is committed to the equitable selection of a diverse student body in three priority areas: Aboriginal peoples Students from rural and remote areas Economically disadvantaged students. The interview process is part of an inclusive, holistic approach to admissions at Memorial University. It takes personal characteristics as well as academic history into consideration in the selection process. Interviewed applicants participate in eight (ten minute) MMI stations with one assessor at each station, and a 30-minute two-person traditional panel interview

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion