ArticleMedical education online2018
Does the sequence of rotations in Multiple Mini Interview stations influence the candidates' performance?
Article in Medical education online, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability and acceptability of the multiple mini-interview for selection of residents in cardiology.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2020Article
- Employing Multiple Mini Interviews in Selection Processes for Psychology Professional Training Programs: Ten Tips for Effective Implementation.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Multiple Mini Interviews (MMIs), the candidates start out with different stations depending on the sequence of rotation they are assigned; thus, their perceived difficulty level and nervousness with their first station may differ. We examined whether such differences influenced the candidates' overall performance in the MMI. A 32-item questionnaire was developed and administered to candidates for admission interviews at a medical school regarding their perceptions of the MMI. Candidates' interview scores were also obtained and were compared across groups who differed in the sequence of rotation of MMI stations. Candidates felt nervous when they encountered the first station, which did not differ regardless of which station was their first encounter. Candidates were neutral regarding whether their first station was more difficult than the others and about whether its difficulty level influenced their overall performance in the test. Although candidates' perceived station difficulty differed across stations, there were no differences in their performance in each station between those it was their first station and those it was not. Candidates' total interview scores also did not differ across groups of different sequence of rotations. The MMI is a fair process as it does not give disadvantage to those who encounter a more difficult station than others for their first station.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.