The impact of the medical school admissions interview: a systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.76138Abstract
Background: Interviews are considered an important part of the medical school admissions process but have been critiqued based on bias and reliability concerns since the 1950s. To determine the impact of the interview, this systematic review investigated the characteristics and outcomes of medical students admitted with and without interviews.
Methods: We searched four literature databases from inception through August 2022; all studies comparing medical students admitted with and without interviews were included. We excluded studies from outside the medical school setting and non-research reports. We reviewed interview type, study design, quality, and outcomes.
Results: Eight studies from five institutions across five countries were included. Six reported no demographic differences between students admitted with and without interviews; one found that more men were admitted without than with semi-structured interviews, and both cohorts had similar academic and clinical performance. Structured interviews admitted students who scored higher on clinical exams and social competence and lower on academic exams. Cohorts admitted with and without structured interviews had similar mental health issues by their final year of medical school.
Discussion: This review suggests that students admitted with and without unstructured and semi-structured interviews were similar demographically, academically, and clinically. Moreover, structured interviews selected more socially competent students who performed better clinically but worse academically. Further research is needed to determine the impact of the selection interview in medical school admissions.
References
Association of American Medical Colleges. Medical School Admission Requirements™ (MSAR®) report for applicants and advisors: interview procedures, 2023. Available from https://students-residents.aamc.org/media/7051/download [Accessed Aug 24, 2022].
Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada. Admission requirements of Canadian faculties of medicine. Ottawa, ON: 2021. Available from: https://www.afmc.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/2021_admission-requirements_EN.pdf.
Dunleavy DM, Whittaker KM. The evolving medical school admissions interview. Analysis in Brief. Association of American Medical Colleges; 2011;11(7). Available from https://www.aamc.org/media/5921/download [Accessed Aug 31, 2022].
Puryear JB, Lewis LA. Description of the interview process in selecting students for admission to U.S. medical schools. J Med Educ. Nov 1981;56(11):881-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-198111000-00001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-198111000-00001
Hamidi Z, Durning SJ, Torre D, Liotta R, Dong T. Do Interviews Influence Admission Decisions? An Empirical Analysis From an Institution. Mil Med. 2021 Feb 26;186(3-4):426-436. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usaa477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usaa477
Eva KW, Reiter HI, Rosenfeld J, Trinh K, Wood TJ, Norman GR. Association between a medical school admission process using the multiple mini-interview and national licensing examination scores. Jama. Dec 5 2012;308(21):2233-40. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.36914 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.36914
Kreiter CD, Yin P, Solow C, Brennan RL. Investigating the reliability of the medical school admissions interview. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2004;9(2):147-59. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AHSE.0000027464.22411.0f DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AHSE.0000027464.22411.0f
Kelly EL. A critique of the interview. In: Gee HH, Cowles JT, eds. The appraisal of applicants to medical schools. Association of American Medical Colleges; 1957:78-84.
Chatterjee A, Greif C, Witzburg R, Henault L, Goodell K, Paasche-Orlow MK. US medical school applicant experiences of bias on the interview trail. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2020;31(1):185-200. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2020.0017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2020.0017
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. Dec 2013;35(12):1027-41. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.829912 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.829912
Rees EL, Hawarden AW, Dent G, Hays R, Bates J, Hassell AB. Evidence regarding the utility of multiple mini-interview (MMI) for selection to undergraduate health programs: a BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 37. Med Teach. May 2016;38(5):443-55. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1158799 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1158799
Lin JC, Lokhande A, Margo CE, Greenberg PB. Best practices for interviewing applicants for medical school admissions: a systematic review. Perspect Med Educ. 2022 Oct;11(5):239-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-022-00726-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S40037-022-00726-8
Edwards JC, Johnson EK, Molidor JB. The interview in the admission process. Acad Med. 1990 Mar;65(3):167-77. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199003000-00008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199003000-00008
Johnson EK, Edwards JC. Current practices in admission interviews at U.S. medical schools. Acad Med. 1991 Jul;66(7):408-12. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199107000-00008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199107000-00008
Rolfe IE, Pearson S, Powis DA, Smith AJ. Time for a review of admission to medical school? Lancet. 1995 Nov 18;346(8986):1329-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92344-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(95)92344-6
Tutton P, Price M. Selection of medical students. BMJ. 2002 May 18;324(7347):1170-1. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1170
Albanese MA, Snow MH, Skochelak SE, Huggett KN, Farrell PM. Assessing personal qualities in medical school admissions. Acad Med. 2003 Mar;78(3):313-21. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200303000-00016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200303000-00016
Monroe A, Quinn E, Samuelson W, Dunleavy DM, Dowd KW. An overview of the medical school admission process and use of applicant data in decision making: what has changed since the 1980s? Acad Med. 2013 May;88(5):672-81. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828bf252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828bf252
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. Mar 29 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Chung HO, Oczkowski SJ, Hanvey L, Mbuagbaw L, You JJ. Educational interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ. Apr 29 2016;16:131. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0653-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0653-x
Smith SR. Medical school and residency performances of students admitted with and without an admission interview. Acad Med. Aug 1991;66(8):474-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199108000-00012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199108000-00012
Bågedahl-Strindlund M, Mårtensson B, Fredrikson S. Medical students admitted by interviews as good as the rest of the students in examination following internship. They were also younger at the time of the final examination. Lakartidningen. 2008;105(48-49):3522-5.
Dahlin M, Söderberg S, Holm U, Nilsson I, Farnebo LO. Comparison of communication skills between medical students admitted after interviews or on academic merits. BMC Med Educ. Jun 22 2012;12:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-12-46 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-12-46
Wilkinson D, Casey MG, Eley DS. Removing the interview for medical school selection is associated with gender bias among enrolled students. Med J Aust. Feb 3 2014;200(2):96-9. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja13.10103 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5694/mja13.10103
Casey M, Wilkinson D, Fitzgerald J, Eley D, Connor J. Clinical communication skills learning outcomes among first year medical students are consistent irrespective of participation in an interview for admission to medical school. Med Teach. Jul 2014;36(7):640-2. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.907880 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.907880
Yusoff MSB. The outcomes that an interview-based medical school admission process has on academic performance, psychological health, personality traits, and emotional intelligence. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2018;13(6):503-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2018.09.003
Yusoff MS, Rahim AF, Baba AA, Ismail SB, Esa AR. A study of psychological distress in two cohorts of first-year medical students that underwent different admission selection processes. Malays J Med Sci. 2012 Jul;19(3):29-35.
Azman MA-z, Yaacob NA, Yusoff MSB, Noor SH. Comparative study on medical student personality traits between interview and non-interview admission method in University Sains Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014;116:2281-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.560
Cook DA, Reed DA. Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education. Acad Med. Aug 2015;90(8):1067-76. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000786 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000786
Reed DA, Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Levine RB, Kern DE, Wright SM. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA. Sep 5 2007;298(9):1002-9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.9.1002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.9.1002
Luckoski J, Jean D, Thelen A, Mazer L, George B, Kendrick DE. How do programs measure resident performance? A multi-institutional inventory of general surgery assessments. J Surg Educ. Nov-Dec 2021;78(6):e189-e195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2021.08.024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2021.08.024
Aagaard T, Lund H, Juhl C. Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders? BMC Med Res Methodol. Nov 22 2016;16(1):161. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0264-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0264-6
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 John C Lin, Christopher Shin, Paul B Greenberg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Submission of an original manuscript to the Canadian Medical Education Journal will be taken to mean that it represents original work not previously published, that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication. If accepted for publication, it will be published online and it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, for commercial purposes, in any language, without the consent of the publisher.
Authors who publish in the Canadian Medical Education Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 Canada Licence. This licence allows anyone to copy and distribute the article for non-commercial purposes provided that appropriate attribution is given. For details of the rights an author grants users of their work, please see the licence summary and the full licence.
