scholarly journals How Different Medical School Selection Processes Call upon Different Personality Characteristics

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e0150645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nienke R. Schripsema ◽  
Anke M. van Trigt ◽  
Martha A. van der Wal ◽  
Janke Cohen-Schotanus
PEDIATRICS ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-140
Author(s):  
David Scheff

I was delighted to read "Teaching Interviewing" by Korsch."1 Most interesting was her query: "Why do certain well-trained physicians recoil from patients" expression of emotion and withdraw into technology whenever possible?" As a pediatric resident who teaches residents and medical students, I would like to suggest several possible answers. First, medical school selection committees rarely pick candidates for their humanitarianism. Indeed, idealistic statements from candidates are often viewed as "unrealistic" and "immature." Second, relating to patients is rarely discussed or encouraged in training medical students or residents. Medical students are imprinted with the technological.


2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillippa Poole ◽  
Boaz Shulruf

INTRODUCTION: Medical school selection is a first step in developing a general practice workforce. AIM: To determine the relationship between medical school selection scores and intention to pursue a career in general practice. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort study of students selected in 2006 and 2007 for The University of Auckland medical programme, who completed an exit survey on career intentions. Students are ranked for selection into year 2 of a six-year programme by combining grade point average from prior university achievement (60%), interview (25%) and Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test (UMAT) scores (15%). The main outcome measure was level of interest in general practice at exit. Logistic regression assessed whether any demographic variables or admission scores predicted a ‘strong’ interest in general practice. RESULTS: None of interview scores, grade point average, age, gender, or entry pathway predicted a ‘strong’ interest in general practice. Only UMAT scores differentiated between those with a ‘strong’ interest versus those with ‘some’ or ‘no’ interest, but in an inverse fashion. The best predictor of a ‘strong’ interest in general practice was a low UMAT score of between 45 and 55 on all three UMAT sections (OR 3.37, p=0.020). Yet, the academic scores at entry of students with these UMAT scores were not lower than those of their classmates. DISCUSSION: Setting inappropriately high cut-points for medical school selection may exclude applicants with a propensity for general practice. These findings support the use of a wider lens through which to view medical school selection tools. KEYWORDS: Cognitive tests; general practice; health workforce; medical student career choice; selection; UMAT


1999 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. VanSusteren ◽  
Emanuel Suter ◽  
Lynn J. Romrell ◽  
Linda Lanier ◽  
Robert L. Hatch

2008 ◽  
Vol 188 (6) ◽  
pp. 349-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Wilkinson ◽  
Jianzhen Zhang ◽  
Gerard J Byrne ◽  
Haida Luke ◽  
Ieva Z Ozolins ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricky Ellis ◽  
Peter Brennan ◽  
Jennifer Cleland ◽  
Amanda Lee ◽  
Duncan Scrimgeour

Abstract Aims Selection into UK medical school involves a combination of three measures: prior academic attainment, selection tests (e.g. the University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT), Biomedical Admissions Test (BMAT), or Graduate Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT)) followed by interview. We investigated the predictive power of current UK medical selection tests and measures of prior attainment on success in the Membership of the Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination. Methods The UKMED database was used to analyse A-Levels and medical school selection data for all UK graduates who attempted the MRCS Part A written examination (n = 9729) and Part B clinical examination (n = 4644) between 2007 and 2017. Univariate analysis and Pearson correlation coefficients examined the relationship between selection scores and first attempt MRCS success. Results Successful MRCS Part A candidates scored higher in A-Levels, UCAT, BMAT and GAMSAT examinations (p < 0.05) than their unsuccessful peers, but no differences were observed for MRCS Part B. Statistically significant positive correlation was found between MRCS Part A, BMAT (r = 0.32, p < 0.001) and GAMSAT scores (r = 0.35, p = <0.001). While a weaker statistically significant correlation was found between Part A, A-Level (r = 0.14, p < 0.001) and UCAT scores (r = 0.25, p < 0.001). Conclusions This, the first study to investigate the relationship between all UK medical school selection tests and success in a postgraduate examination found statistically significant correlations between selection test scores and performance on Part A of the MRCS. The strength of correlations found in this study are similar to those of other validated selection tests used in the United States.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document