ReviewAdvances in medical education and practice2019
Multiple Mini-Interviews: Current Perspectives on Utility and Limitations.
Review in Advances in medical education and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Insights into undergraduate medical student selection tools: a systematic review and meta-analysisJournal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2024Pooled it
- AI-Generated Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) Stations for Medical School Admissions: Psychometric Evaluation.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- The impact of GenAI on applicant behaviour, performance, and interview reliability during virtual interviews for medical school admissions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Medical school admission processes to target rural applicants: an international scoping review and mapping of Australian practices.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Multiple Mini Interviews vs Traditional Interviews: Investigating Racial and Socioeconomic Differences in Interview Processes.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- Piloting Virtual Multiple Mini Interviews (MMI) on Undergraduate Medical Students: A Multisource Feedback Analysis.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- Multiple mini-interviews as admission process: A study on perception of health science students in Universiti Brunei Darussalam.PloS one · 2024Article
- Conducting multiple mini-interviews in the midst of COVID-19 pandemic.Medical education online · 2021Article
- Physician associates advance patient safety.Future healthcare journal · 2021Article
- MBBS admission criteria as predictor of academic performance in a medical college of Pakistan.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Admission Criteria for Undergraduate Nursing Programs: A Narrative Literature Review.SAGE open nursingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing role of healthcare professionals urged admissions committees to restructure their selection process and assess key personal attributes rather than academic achievements only. Multiple mini interviews (MMIs) were designed in 2002 to assess such domains in prospective healthcare professions. Being a high-stake assessment, the utility and limitations of MMI need to be explored. The purpose of this article is to review the available evidence to establish its utility. The claim of the reliability is verified by the studies assessing the effect of number of stations, duration of stations, format and scoring systems of stations and number of raters assessing the applicants. Similarly, by gathering evidence concerning its content validity, convergent/divergent correlation and predictive ability, validity is ensured. Finally, its acceptability and feasibility along with limitations is discussed. This article concludes by providing recommendations for further work required to deal with the limitations and enhance its utility.
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.