Assessing the predictive validity of the UCAT-A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

backgroundThe University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT) is an admissions assessment used by a consortium of universities across the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, to aid the selection of applicants to medical and dental degree programmes. The UCAT aims to measure the mental aptitude and professional behaviours required to become successful doctors and dentists. We conducted a systematic review to establish the predictive value of the UCAT across measures of performance at undergraduate and post-graduate levels.

methodsA literature search was conducted in April 2020 using eight electronic databases: MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, SCOPUS, Web of Science, EThOS, OpenGrey, PROSPERO, and the UCAT website. Data were extracted from selected studies and tabulated as results matrices. A narrative synthesis was performed.

resultsTwenty-four studies satisfied our inclusion criteria, 23 of which were deemed to be of good quality (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). For over 70% of univariate data points, the UCAT exerted no statistically significant predictive validity; for the remainder, predictive power was weak. The cognitive total and verbal reasoning subtests had the largest evidence base as weakly positive predictors of academic performance. The SJT subtest was a weak predictor of professional behaviour during medical school. Studies specific to dental schools demonstrated variable findings across the five studies. Only 1 study looked at post-graduate outcome measures and demonstrated that the UCAT was not a predictor of health- or conduct-related fitness to practice declarations at GMC registration.

conclusionsThese data provide some support for the use of cognitive total and verbal reasoning subtests as part of medical school selection. Further research is needed to investigate outcomes beyond professional registration and for dental students.