Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28984374›Full record

ArticleMedical education2018

Lessons learned from 15 years of non-grades-based selection for medical school.

Karen M Stegers-Jager

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Unraveling the medical residency selection game.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Who is allowed to study medicine? - regulations and evidence.GMS journal for medical education · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Karen M Stegers-JagerInstitute of Medical Education Research Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2947-6099

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextThirty years ago, it was suggested in the Edinburgh Declaration that medical school applicants should be selected not only on academic, but also on non-academic, attributes. The main rationale behind extending medical school selection procedures with the evaluation of (non-academic) personal qualities is that this will lead to the selection of students who will perform better as a doctor than those who are selected on the basis of academic measures only. A second rationale is the expectation that this will lead to a representative health workforce as a result of reduced adverse impact. The aims of this paper are (i) to describe what can be learned about the use of selection criteria other than grades from over 15 years of Dutch experience and (ii) to summarise current knowledge on the issue of adverse impact in relation to non-grades-based selection.

methodsA narrative review was undertaken of the (published) evidence that has resulted from non-grades-based school-specific selection procedures in the Netherlands and from recent explorations of the effect of the use of non-grades-based selection criteria on student diversity.

resultsThe Dutch evidence is grouped into five key themes: the effect of participation in voluntary selection procedures, the assessment of pre-university extracurricular activities, the use of work samples, Dutch experiences with situational judgement tests and the effects of changing circumstances. This is followed by several lessons learned for medical schools that aim to increase their student diversity.

conclusionOver the last 30 years, important steps towards reliable and valid methods for measuring non-academic abilities have been taken. The current paper describes several lessons that can be learned from the steps taken in the Dutch context. The importance of sharing evidence gathered around the globe and building on this evidence to reach our goal of predicting who will be a good doctor is acknowledged.

Indexed as

AchievementCultural DiversitySchool Admission CriteriaEducational MeasurementHumansNetherlandsStudents, Medical

Identifiers

PMID28984374
PMCPMC5765503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.