The influence of MCAT and GPA preadmission academic metrics on interview scores

Scoping review of current challenges and circumstances impacting Indigenous applications to Canadian medical schools

Introduction

Considering the relevant 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommendations, this paper reviews the current state of Canadian medical schools' Indigenous admissions processes and explores continued barriers faced by Indigenous applicants.

Methods

A summary of literature illustrating disadvantages for Indigenous applicants of current admissions tools is presented. A grey literature search of current admissions requirements, interview processes, and other relevant data from each medical school was performed. Tables comparing differences in their approaches are included. A calculation of Indigenous access to medical school seats compared to the broader Canadian population was conducted. Gaps in execution are explored, culminating in a table of recommendations.

Results

Despite formal commitments to reduce barriers, Indigenous applicants to medical school in Canada still face barriers that non-Indigenous applicants do not. Most programs use tools for admission known to disadvantage Indigenous applicants. Indigenous applicants do not have equitable access to medical school seats. Facilitated Indigenous stream processes first ensure Indigenous applicants meet all minimum requirements of Canadian students, and then require further work.

Discussion

Seven years after the Truth and Reconciliation Commission called on Canadian universities and governments to train more Indigenous health care providers, there has been limited progress to reduce the structural disadvantages Indigenous students face when applying to medical school. Based on best practices observed in Canada and coupled with relevant Indigenous-focused literature, recommendations are made for multiple stakeholders.

Conclusions

The study was limited by the data available on numbers of Indigenous applicants and matriculants. Where available, data are not encouraging as to equitable access to medical school for Indigenous populations in Canada. These findings were presented at the International Congress of Academic Medicine 2023 Conference, April 2023, Quebec City, Canada.

Comparison of the Multiple Mini-Interview and the Traditional Interview in Medical School Admissions: Lessons Learned Using a Hybrid Model at One Institution

PURPOSE

Medical school admissions interviews are a critical form of assessment; however, the most effective interview strategy is debated. This study compares the traditional interview (TI) and multiple mini-interview (MMI) within a hybrid TI-MMI model at one medical school to determine whether the interview approaches reveal different information about applicants and whether a hybrid model results in a more diversified applicant pool.

METHOD

Admissions data from 3 application cycles at the Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell were used. The TI was used in 2017-2018 and the hybrid TI-MMI model in 2018-2019 and 2019-2020. Applicants were scored on a 5-point scale and referred to a voting committee for acceptance consideration if interview scores met threshold criteria. Changes in the number of students referred to the committee using the TI vs the TI-MMI score criteria were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 2017-2018 (TI only), 683 applicants were interviewed; in 2018-2019 (TI-MMI), 844 applicants were interviewed; and in 2019-2020 (TI-MMI), 805 applicants were interviewed. Medium correlations were found between total MMI and TI scores in 2018-2019 ( ρ = 0.37, P < .001) and 2019-2020 ( ρ = 0.33, P < .001). No differences were found in TI scores between 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 ( P = .30), but TI scores were significantly lower in 2019-2020 vs 2017-2018 ( P < .001) and 2018-2019 ( P = .002). Overall, a 10% to 18% increase was found in the number of applicants referred to the voting committee when using hybrid criteria, with a 19% to 27% increase in underrepresented in medicine applicants.

CONCLUSIONS

The TI-MMI model may allow for a more holistic interview approach and an expanded pool of applicants, particularly underrepresented in medicine applicants, considered for acceptance.

US Medical School Admissions Leaders' Experiences With Barriers to and Advancements in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

IMPORTANCE

Despite decades-long calls for increasing racial and ethnic diversity, the medical profession continues to exclude members of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, and Indigenous groups.

OBJECTIVE

To describe US medical school admissions leaders' experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study involved key-informant interviews of 39 deans and directors of admission from 37 US allopathic medical schools across the range of student body racial and ethnic composition. Interviews were conducted in person and online from October 16, 2019, to March 27, 2020, and analyzed from October 2019 to March 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Participant experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion.

RESULTS

Among 39 participants from 37 medical schools, admissions experience ranged from 1 to 40 years. Overall, 56.4% of participants identified as women, 10.3% as Asian American, 25.6% as Black or African American, 5.1% as Hispanic or Latinx, and 61.5% as White (participants could report >1 race and/or ethnicity). Participants characterized diversity broadly, with limited attention to racial injustice. Barriers to advancing racial and ethnic diversity included lack of leadership commitment; pressure from faculty and administrators to overemphasize academic scores and school rankings; and political and social influences, such as donors and alumni. Accreditation requirements, holistic review initiatives, and local policy motivated reforms but may also have inadvertently lowered expectations and accountability. Strategies to overcome challenges included narrative change and revision of school leadership structure, admissions goals, practices, and committee membership.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this qualitative study, admissions leaders characterized the ways in which entrenched beliefs, practices, and power structures in medical schools may perpetuate institutional racism, with far-reaching implications for health equity. Participants offered insights on how to remove inequitable structures and implement process changes. Without such action, calls for racial justice will likely remain performative, and racism across health care institutions will continue.

Best practices for interviewing applicants for medical school admissions: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Interviews are commonly used to select applicants for medical school, residency, and fellowship. However, interview techniques vary in acceptability, feasibility, reliability, and validity. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of different interview methods in selecting the best qualified applicants for admission to medical school and developed a logic model to implement best practices for interviewing.

METHODS

Five electronic literature databases were searched for comparative studies related to interviewing in medical schools from inception through February 1, 2021. Inclusion criteria included publications in English that compared different methods of conducting a selection interview in medical schools with a controlled trial design. General study characteristics, measurement methodologies, and outcomes were reviewed. Quality appraisal was performed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) and the Oxford Risk of Bias Scale. Based on these findings, a logic model was constructed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. The multiple mini-interview (MMI) was reliable, unbiased, and predicted clinical and academic performance; the virtual MMI increased reliability and lowered costs. For unstructured interviews, blinding interviewers to academic scores reduced bias towards higher scorers; student and faculty interviewers rated applicants similarly. Applicants preferred structured over unstructured interviews. Study quality was above average per the MERSQI, risk of bias was high per the Oxford scale, and between-study heterogeneity was substantial.

DISCUSSION

There were few high-quality studies on interviewing applicants for admission to medical school; the MMI appears to offer a reliable method of interviewing. A logic model can provide a conceptual framework for conducting evidence-based admissions interviews.

Diversity and Inclusion in Orthopaedic Surgery from Medical School to Practice: AOA Critical Issues

Orthopaedic surgery has historically been one of the least diverse fields in medicine in the U.S. Despite having been declared a critical issue by the American Orthopaedic Association, a lack of diversity and inclusion across all metrics remains a persistent problem. In order to balance representation within orthopaedic surgery, a multiyear and multilevel approach should be considered across the life cycle of a surgeon. Talented individuals from diverse backgrounds must be identified and given early exposure to orthopaedic surgery. They must be nurtured, mentored, and retained. Representation at the medical student, resident, and faculty level is vital to ensuring diversity across the next generation of surgeons.We cannot alter representation within orthopaedics unless we broaden the candidate selection pool. Medical school classes provide the selection pool for residency, residency provides the candidates for fellowship, fellowships provide the candidates for employment, and employment provides the pool for promotion to leadership positions. Through each progression, there is a loss of underrepresented applicants, which leads to a lack of balanced representation in orthopaedic surgery. With stronger efforts to identify and retain individuals at each phase of a surgeon's career, we hope to mitigate the loss of talented and diverse individuals from this field.We challenge the paradigm of increasing diversity that focuses only on the resident selection level. Instead, efforts must begin at the medical student level. Efforts for early and meaningful exposure to the field through a musculoskeletal curriculum and rotations as well as connection through mentorship and sponsorship are vital for retention. At each ascending level of education, reinvestment in each individual is critical. Exposure, mentorship, retention, and promotion should lead to a more diverse and rich future. To achieve this, deliberate and longitudinal action should be instituted to increase diversity within orthopaedics.

Comparison of student and faculty interviewers using ratings data for admissions decisions

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlations of cognitive and noncognitive dental school admission factors with interview ratings provided by faculty and student interviewers.

METHODS

Interviewees for the 2019-2021 admissions cycles underwent a 90-minute period consisting of two 45-min interviews and received two interview scores ranging from 1.0 to 2.3. Regression models were utilised to evaluate factors associated with interviewer type and admission status, The correlation strength between faculty and student interview scores was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 177 applicants were interviewed, and 69 students were admitted over two admission cycles. Admitted students received higher interview ratings compared with nonadmitted applicants after adjusting for cognitive and noncognitive admission factors (average difference = -0.068; 95% CI = -0.123, -0.014). No statistically significant relationship was found between any cognitive admissions factor and interview score. However, having prior leadership role experiences was associated with better faculty score, after adjusting for student interviewee score. There was a strong linear correlation (r = .92) between faculty and student interview scores, with 0.809 change in faculty score with each additional student interview score (95% CI = 0.735, 0.883).

CONCLUSION

The relationship between faculty and student scores was linear and strongly correlated, suggesting that faculty and student interviewers were comparable in their interview scoring. Leadership experience and potential could be advantageous qualities that improve faculty interviewer ratings. However, having a mix of faculty and Student interviewers may promote evaluation of candidates from different aspects, as students are familiar with the learning environment in dental school and may provide a unique perspective on an applicant's background and suitability for the program.

Holistic Admissions Review in Nursing Education: A Concept Analysis Using Rodgers' Evolutionary Method

AIM

The aim of this study was to analyze holistic review within the context of collegiate nursing program admissions.

BACKGROUND

Holistic review is the evaluation of individual qualifications for college admission based on a pattern of individualized factors, including standardized scores, personal characteristics, experiences, abilities, and educational/professional "fit." Medical schools regularly use holistic review, and more nursing schools may adopt holistic review in the future.

METHOD

Rodgers' evolutionary method of concept analysis was used to examine usage in current praxis.

RESULTS

Findings support a desire to enhance diversity in collegiate, health-related programs while increasing numbers of culturally competent, qualified providers representative of the US population.

CONCLUSION

Holistic review promotes diversity of nursing students and future nurse providers. This concept analysis provides a unified definition of holistic review to promote educational and health-care-related equity through increased representativeness of nursing students and future nurses.

Factors Associated with Acceptance of Repeat MCAT Test Takers into a West Virginian Allopathic Medical School

OBJECTIVES

A paucity of information exists to advise medical school applicants who have had to retake the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) to achieve a competitive score. To better advise repeat test takers from West Virginia and other Appalachian and southern areas, MCAT data from West Virginia applicants were analyzed and compared with national data.

METHODS

In the application cycles of 2017-2020, the following factors were analyzed in relation to medical school acceptance in West Virginia applicants: MCAT scores, the number of test-taking attempts, biology-chemistry-physics-math grade point average, time between test-taking attempts, and academic major. MCAT data from medical school applicants from West Virginia who took the test more than once also were compared with national data.

RESULTS

Of the total repeat test takers from West Virginia (N = 285) in the study timeframe, 57 (20%) were ultimately accepted into medical school. Factors associated with medical school acceptance were as follows: first MCAT test score (odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95% confidence level [CL] 1.2-1.4, P < 0.001), change in MCAT test score (OR 1.2, 95% CL 1.1-1.3, P = 0.0015), and biology-chemistry-physics-math grade point average (OR 15.1, 95% CL 4.2-54.8, P < 0.0001). The highest benefit for improved scores occurred between the first and second attempts. The highest point gain occurred when the first MCAT score was in the range of 477 to 487 (<1st-12th percentile); this finding was not found in the national data.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the study was limited to West Virginia medical school applicants, this information could prove useful in advising premedical applicants from other Appalachian and southern US areas.

A multi-pronged, antiracist approach to optimize equity in medical school admissions

BACKGROUND

Increasing the number of physicians who identify as an underrepresented minority (URM) has been a focus for decades. Despite the US Department of Health and Human Services establishing The Council on Graduate Medical Education focussing on the underrepresentation of minorities in medicine in 1990, US medical students in 1998-1999 were15.2% URM and twenty years later, URM students comprise only 14.6% of matriculants. This reflected our experience at University of Maryland School of Medicine despite our diverse community where over 60% of the population identify as Black or African-American. We share our strategies to mitigate bias in the admissions process and our resulting outcomes.

METHODS

We implemented multiple interventions including interviewer training, recruitment strategies, holistic screening, changes in the interview process and increased racial, ethnic and gender diversity on our admissions committee. These changes were made over a two-year period initially focussing on the committee, followed by focussed interventions for interviewers.

RESULTS

With these interventions, we demonstrated an improvement in the number of URM applicants that matriculated. In 2019, we had the first class that was in which no one ethnicity or race comprised the majority of the class, with 54% of matriculants identifying as students of colour. In 2020, in addition to sustaining a majority of the class identifying as students of colour, the proportion of URM students increased from 10%-13% for the preceding 3 years, to 24% of the entering class.

CONCLUSION

The number of physicians who identify as URM must be increased for the benefit of our patients and health care system. Unconscious bias training for interviewers, focused recruitment strategies, holistic screening deemphasising the MCAT, blinding interviewers to MCAT scores and GPA, and increasing admissions committee diversity are five concrete steps that yielded the desired outcome of increasing URM representation among our medical school matriculants.

Medical Student Selection

Medical school admissions committees are tasked with fulfilling the values of their institutions through careful recruitment. Making accurate predictions regarding the enrollment behavior of admitted students is critical to intentionally formulating class composition and impacts long-term physician representation.

The role of the interview in residency selection: A mixed-methods study

CONTEXT

Residency programmes invest considerable time and resources in candidate interviews as a result of their perceived ability to reveal important social traits. However, studies examining the ability of interviews to predict resident performance have shown mixed findings, and the role of the interview in candidate evaluation remains unclear. This mixed-methods study, conducted in an anaesthesiology residency programme at a large academic medical centre, examined how interviews contributed to candidate assessment and whether the addition of behavioural questions to interviews altered their role in the evaluation process.

METHODS

During the 2018-2019 residency selection season in the Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care at the University of Pennsylvania, independent ratings for each interviewee were collected from faculty interviewers. Consensus ratings subsequently established by committee were also collected. Committee meetings were audiorecorded and transcribed for qualitative analysis. Behavioural questions were integrated into half of interview days. Ratings of candidates interviewed on behavioural question days were compared statistically with those of candidates interviewed on non-behavioural question days.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis showed that interviewers heavily emphasised candidates' application files in evaluating the interviews. Interviewers focused on candidates' academic records and favoured candidates whose interview behaviours were consistent with their applications and whose applications demonstrated similarities to interviewers' traits. The addition of behavioural questions demonstrated little ability to alter these dynamics. Quantitatively, there were no significant differences in candidate rating outcomes between behavioural and non-behavioural interviewing days, whereas a higher medical school rating and higher score on the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 were associated with a more favourable consensus rating.

CONCLUSIONS

Residency candidates' application files predisposed interviewers' experience and evaluation of interviews, preventing the interviews from providing discrete assessments of interpersonal qualities, even when behavioural questions were included. In the continued effort to perform well-rounded assessments of residency candidates, further research and reflection on the role of interviewing in evaluation are necessary.