is a Medical Student, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
is a Medical Student, the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
J Grad Med Educ. 2024 Apr;16(2):151-165. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-23-00115.1. Epub 2024 Apr 15.
Although the selection interview is a standard admission practice for graduate medical education (GME) programs in the United States, there is a dearth of recent reviews on optimizing the trainee interview process, which has low reliability, high cost, and major risk of bias. To investigate the evidence base for different selection interview practices in GME. We searched 4 literature databases from inception through September 2022. Two investigators independently conducted title/abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment. Disagreements were mediated by discussion. We used backward reference searching of included articles to identify additional studies. We included studies of different interview methods and excluded literature reviews, non-GME related publications, and studies comparing different applicant populations. We examined study characteristics, applicant and interviewer preferences, and interview format. We evaluated study quality using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). Of 2192 studies, 39 (2%) met our inclusion criteria. The evidence base was rated as moderately low quality using MERSQI criteria. Applicants reported preferences for several one-on-one interviews lasting 15 to 20 minutes, interviews by current trainees, and interviews including social events with only trainees. Applicants had mixed perceptions of virtual versus in-person interviews and reported that virtual interviews saved costs. The multiple mini interview (MMI) required more applicant and interviewer time than individual interviews but demonstrated construct and predictive validity and was preferred by applicants and interviewers. Based on moderately low-quality evidence, using the MMI, training interviewers, and providing applicants with basic program information in advance should be considered for GME selection interviews.
虽然选拔面试是美国研究生医学教育 (GME) 项目的标准入学程序，但最近对优化学员面试流程的审查很少，该流程可靠性低、成本高且存在重大偏倚风险。为了调查 GME 中不同选拔面试实践的证据基础。我们从开始到 2022 年 9 月搜索了 4 个文献数据库。两名调查员独立进行标题/摘要筛选、全文审查、数据提取和质量评估。通过讨论解决分歧。我们使用包含文章的回溯参考搜索来识别其他研究。我们包括了不同面试方法的研究，并排除了文献综述、与 GME 无关的出版物以及比较不同申请人群体的研究。我们检查了研究特征、申请人和面试官的偏好以及面试格式。我们使用医学教育研究研究质量工具 (MERSQI) 评估研究质量。在 2192 项研究中，有 39 项（2%）符合我们的纳入标准。根据 MERSQI 标准，证据基础的质量被评为中等偏低。申请人报告了对持续 15 至 20 分钟的几个一对一面试、当前学员进行的面试以及包括仅学员参加的社交活动的面试的偏好。申请人对虚拟与面对面访谈的看法不一，并报告说虚拟访谈节省了成本。多站迷你面试 (MMI) 比单独面试需要更多的申请人和面试官时间，但表现出结构和预测有效性，并且受到申请人和面试官的青睐。基于中等偏低质量的证据，在 GME 选拔面试中，应考虑使用 MMI、培训面试官和提前向申请人提供基本的计划信息。
