Assessment centres for core medical training: how do the assessors feel this compares with the traditional interview?

Abstract

There is still work to do on the best components to include but the principle of multiple assessments to examine differing parts of the person specification seems, subjectively, to be supported.

A systematic review of stakeholder views of selection methods for medical schools admission

“…86% felt interview was necessary, 93% believing no interview was unacceptable. 8 Mitchison 2009 a [ 86 ] Research paper UK 1 Post graduate deanery Quantitative Selection centre with 3 types of station: structured interview/ case based discussion/ simulated patient Assessors- N = 53, RR 77%. Feedback questionnaire Frequency & percen-tage responses.…”

“…Emerging evidence suggests that selectors, in both in medical school and postgraduate residency settings, are supportive of SCs. Overall assessors rate SCs highly for relevance, fairness and opportunity for candidates to demonstrate their ability appropriateness to selection [ 66 , 86 , 106 ]. When compared to stations comprising structured interviews, portfolio review and a presentation station, simulated stations were rated significantly higher ( p < 0.001) with respect to relevance to selection, opportunity to demonstrate ability and appropriateness to selection [ 66 ].…”

Utility of selection methods for specialist medical training: A BEME (best evidence medical education) systematic review: BEME guide no. 45

“…One article (Patterson et al 2014) was a qualitative study exploring competency models to improve uniformity and calibration of the overall process. Two articles described the Australian GP selection center process, two quantitatively (Roberts et al 2014;Patterson, Rowett, et al 2016) and one qualitatively (Burgess et al 2014), two describing a selection center approach into anesthetics training (Gale et al 2010;Roberts et al 2013), three describing the UK GP selection center approach (Mitchison 2009;Patterson, Baron, et al 2009;Patterson, Lievens, et al 2013) and a systematic review (Patterson, Knight, et al 2016).…”

Improving the efficiency of selection to Core Medical Training: a study of the use of multiple assessment stations

“…In 2007 and 2008 the interview process in the Northern Deanery (Cumbria and the North East of England) consisted of three locally-devised assessment stations: a structured interview, a case-based discussion and a communication station, all described elsewhere. 7 In 2009 the selection process evolved in accordance with the national scheme led by the RCPL. 8 Despite the inherent difficulties involved in the evaluation of a selection process, the changes implemented in accordance with the RCPL scheme prompted us to review our selection process.…”

“…In 2009, a national scheme (allowing local shortlisting followed by local interview) led by the RCPL was introduced. 7 Three stations, each lasting for ten minutes had two assessors who each contributed an independent mark, resulting in two marks per task. There was a structured interview including a review of candidate portfolio, a case-based discussion (involving assessment of communication skills) and a third station consisting of a postulated scenario (with an actor) focused on a communication or ethical issue, including the topic of professionalism.…”