Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29724211›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2018

Using the multiple mini interview as an assessment strategy within the first year of a health professions curriculum.

Michael D Wolcott, Jacqueline M Zeeman, Wendy C Cox, Jacqueline E McLaughlin

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael D WolcottUNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, 329 Beard Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Jacqueline M ZeemanUNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, 329 Beard Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Wendy C CoxUNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, 329 Beard Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Jacqueline E McLaughlinUNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, 329 Beard Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. jacqui_mclaughlin@unc.edu.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe multiple mini-interview (MMI) is a common assessment strategy used in student selection. The MMI as an assessment strategy within a health professions curriculum, however, has not been previously studied. This study describes the integration of a 5-station MMI as part of an end-of-year capstone following the first year of a health professions curriculum. The goal of the capstone MMI was to assess professional competencies of students and to offer formative feedback to prepare students for their upcoming clinical practice experiences. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of an MMI integrated into a health professions curriculum.

methodsFive capstone MMI stations were designed to each evaluate a single construct assessed by one rater. A principal component analysis (PCA) was used to evaluate the structure of the model and its ability to distinguish 5 separate constructs. A Multifaceted Rasch Measurement (MFRM) model assessed student performance and estimated the sources of measurement error attributed to 3 facets: student ability, rater stringency, and station difficulty. At the conclusion, students were surveyed about the capstone MMI experience.

resultsThe PCA confirmed the MMI reliably assessed 5 unique constructs and performance on each station was not strongly correlated with one another. The 3-facet MFRM analysis explained 58.79% of the total variance in student scores. Specifically, 29.98% of the variance reflected student ability, 20.25% reflected rater stringency, and 8.56% reflected station difficulty. Overall, the data demonstrated an acceptable fit to the MFRM model. The majority of students agreed the MMI allowed them to effectively demonstrate their communication (80.82%), critical thinking (78.77%), and collaboration skills (70.55%).

conclusionsThe MMI can be a valuable assessment strategy of professional competence within a health professions curriculum. These findings suggest the MMI is well-received by students and can produce reliable results. Future research should explore the impact of using the MMI as a strategy to monitor longitudinal competency development and inform feedback approaches.

Indexed as

CurriculumProfessional CompetenceSchool Admission CriteriaAcademic PerformanceClinical CompetenceCommunicationCooperative BehaviorFemaleHealth OccupationsHumansInterviews as TopicMalePrincipal Component AnalysisPsychometricsThinkingCapstoneCompetency based medical educationMultiple mini interviewNonacademicProfessional competence

Identifiers

PMID29724211
PMCPMC5934879
OpenAlexW2805807208

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.