SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Feasibility of an automated interview grounded in multiple mini interview (MMI) methodology for selection into the health professions: an international multimethod evaluation.

Callwood, A; Gillam, L; Christidis, A; Doulton, J; Harris, J; Piano, M; Kubacki, A; Tiffin, PA; Roberts, K; Tarmey, D; et al. Callwood, A; Gillam, L; Christidis, A; Doulton, J; Harris, J; Piano, M; Kubacki, A; Tiffin, PA; Roberts, K; Tarmey, D; Dalton, D; Valentin, VL (2022) Feasibility of an automated interview grounded in multiple mini interview (MMI) methodology for selection into the health professions: an international multimethod evaluation. BMJ Open, 12 (2). e050394. ISSN 2044-6055 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050394
SGUL Authors: Kubacki, Angela

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (558kB) | Preview

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Global, COVID-driven restrictions around face-to-face interviews for healthcare student selection have forced admission staff to rapidly adopt adapted online systems before supporting evidence is available. We have developed, what we believe is, the first automated interview grounded in multiple mini-interview (MMI) methodology. This study aimed to explore test-retest reliability, acceptability and usability of the system. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Multimethod feasibility study in Physician Associate programmes from two UK and one US university during 2019-2020. PRIMARY, SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Feasibility measures (test-retest reliability, acceptability and usability) were assessed using intraclass correlation (ICC), descriptive statistics, thematic and content analysis. METHODS: Volunteers took (T1), then repeated (T2), the automated MMI, with a 7-day interval (±2) then completed an evaluation questionnaire. Admission staff participated in focus group discussions. RESULTS: Sixty-two students and seven admission staff participated; 34 students and 4 staff from UK and 28 students and 3 staff from US universities. Good-excellent test-retest reliability was observed at two sites (US and UK2) with T1 and T2 ICC between 0.65 and 0.81 (p<0.001) when assessed by individual total scores (range 80.6-119), station total scores 0.6-0.91, p<0.005 and individual site (≥0.79 p<0.001). Mean test re-test ICC across all three sites was 0.82 p<0.001 (95% CI 0.7 to 0.9). Admission staff reported potential to reduce resource costs and bias through a more objective screening tool for preselection or to replace some MMI stations in a 'hybrid model'. Maintaining human interaction through 'touch points' was considered essential. Users positively evaluated the system, stating it was intuitive with an accessible interface. Concepts chosen for dynamic probing needed to be appropriately tailored. CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings suggest that the system is reliable, generating consistent scores for candidates and is acceptable to end users provided human touchpoints are maintained. Thus, there is evidence for the potential of such an automated system to augment healthcare student selection.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Copyright information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Keywords: education & training (see medical education & training), medical education & training, quality in health care, education & training (see medical education & training), quality in health care, medical education & training
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Institute of Medical & Biomedical Education (IMBE)
Academic Structure > Institute of Medical & Biomedical Education (IMBE) > Centre for Clinical Education (INMECE )
Journal or Publication Title: BMJ Open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
9 February 2022Published
20 December 2021Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
UNSPECIFIEDEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000266
UNSPECIFIEDImpact Acceleration FundUNSPECIFIED
UNSPECIFIEDInnovate UKUNSPECIFIED
PubMed ID: 35140144
Web of Science ID: WOS:000754022100048
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/114213
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050394

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item