Simulation in admissions interviews: applicant experiences and programmatic performance prediction

Anne Wildermuth; Alexis Battista; LaKesha N Anderson

doi:10.36834/cmej.78961

Authors

Anne Wildermuth Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Alexis Battista Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
LaKesha N Anderson Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.78961

Abstract

Background: Admissions interviews are frequently used to assess personal and interpersonal attributes required for successful medical practice. Using simulation in interviews to engage applicants in realistic medical scenarios to assess these attributes is novel. This study evaluates applicant perceptions of simulation within multiple mini-interviews (MMI) and reports on subsequent student program performance.

Methods: Physician assistant (PA) program applicants were invited to complete an anonymous post-interview survey that included one free-response question about their admissions experience. We chose to qualitatively analyze the free-response question. Additionally, success metrics of students who experienced simulation-based MMI were compared to prior cohorts who were admitted using traditional interviews.

Results: Applicants undergoing simulation-based interviews in MMI had decreased incidences of major professionalism events, greater on-time program progression, and similar board pass rates compared to applicants who experienced traditional interviews. Several themes, highlighting the applicants’ varied responses to the simulation-based MMI, emerged including showcasing strengths and passion, feelings of fairness, accessing program faculty, and impacts on certainty.

Conclusions: The use of simulation in admissions interviews is a valuable tool for assessing an applicant’s personal attributes in a clinical setting. Applicants admitted using simulation had improved programmatic performance compared to applicants admitted using traditional interviews. Applicants’ perceptions of simulation in interviews are helpful when designing the admissions experience.

Author Biographies

Anne Wildermuth, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

Anne Wildermuth, PhD, PA-C, RD is Assistant Dean for Admissions & Recruitment and an Assistant Professor in the Center for Health Professions Education, School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Henry Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD.

Alexis Battista, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

Alexis Battista is Associate Professor in the Center for Health Professions Education, School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Henry Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD.

LaKesha N Anderson, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

LaKesha N. Anderson is Assistant Professor in the Center for Health Professions Education, School of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and the Henry Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD.

References

Patterson F, Knight A, Dowell J, Nicholson S, Cousans F, Cleland J. How effective are selection methods in medical education? A systematic review. Med Educ. 2016;50(1):36-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12817

Edwards JC, Johnson EK, Molidor JB. The interview in the admission process. Acad Med. 1990;65(3):167-177. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199003000-00008

Association PAE. By the numbers: curriculum report 4: data from the 2018 prerequisite curriculum survey. Washington, DC: PAEA;2019. https://doi.org/10.17538/CR4.2019.003

Milne CK, Bellini LM, Shea JA. Applicants' perceptions of the formal faculty interview during residency recruitment. Acad Med. 2001;76(5):501. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200105000-00028

Tutton PJ. Medical school entrants: semi-structured interview ratings, prior scholastic achievement and personality profiles. Med Educ. 1993;27(4):328-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00277.x

Collins JP, White GR, Petrie KJ, Willoughby EW. A structured panel interview and group exercise in the selection of medical students. Med Educ. 1995;29(5):332-336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1995.tb00021.x

AAMC. Best practices for conducting residency program interviews. In. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Medical Colleges; 2016.

Kent JM, MT. Holistic review in graduate admissions: a report from the council of graduate schools. In: Schools CoG, ed. Washington, D.C.2016.

Pau A, Jeevaratnam K, Chen YS, Fall AA, Khoo C, Nadarajah VD. The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training - a systematic review. Med Teach. 2013;35(12):1027-1041. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2013.829912

Kelly ME, Patterson F, O'Flynn S, Mulligan J, Murphy AW. A systematic review of stakeholder views of selection methods for medical schools admission. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):139. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1235-x

Tekian A. Minority students, affirmative action, and the admission process: a literature review, 1987-1998. Teach Learn Med. 2000;12(1):33-42. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328015tlm1201_6

Van Ments, M. The effective use of role-play: a handbook for teachers and trainers. New York: Koogan Page Publishing, 1989.

Battista A. An activity theory perspective of how scenario-based simulations support learning: a descriptive analysis. Adv Simul (Lond). 2017;2:23. Published 2017 Nov 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-017-0055-0

Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183-193. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180f637f5

Kauschke C, Bahn D, Vesker M, Schwarzer G. The role of emotional valence for processing of facial and verbal stimuli-positivity or negativity bias? Front Psychol. 2019;26(10):1654. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01654