Szkwara Jaclyn Michele, Bannatyne Amy Jean, Asil Mustafa, Craig Belinda, Stokes-Parish Jessica, Bishop Jo
Medical Program, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Aug 28;12:1639532. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1639532. eCollection 2025.
The selection process for medical schools plays a vital role in identifying candidates with the attributes and capabilities needed for success in medicine. Multiple Mini-Interviews (MMI) are widely used to assess non-cognitive attributes like communication, empathy, and ethical judgment. Ensuring their fairness and validity across diverse applicant groups is essential for equitable selection.
This study aimed to investigate: (1) is there evidence to support the factorial validity of MMI structure; (2) whether non-cognitive attributes assessed by MMIs are consistently interpreted across gender groups; and (3) whether gender-related disparities exist in MMI performance.
Data were drawn from applicants to an Australian Medical School across three selection cycles (2022-2024). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to assess the dimensionality of MMI performance, with multiple competing models tested to identify the best-fitting structure. The selected model was then assessed for measurement invariance across gender using Multi-Group CFA. Once scalar invariance was established, latent mean comparisons were conducted to examine gender-related differences in MMI performance.
CFA indicated a well-fitting structure for MMIs, with a higher-order model emerging as the most appropriate representation across cohorts. Measurement invariance testing confirmed scalar invariance across gender groups, indicating that MMI non-cognitive attributes were demonstrated equivalently by males and females. Significant latent mean differences were identified, with female applicants consistently outperforming male applicants across all 3 years.
The results provided empirical support for the factorial validity and measurement fairness of the MMI across gender groups. However, the consistent gender-based performance differences highlight the need for continued research into potential sources of group disparities and how they may impact selections equity. The results are relevant for medical educators and policymakers committed to evidence-based and equitable selection processes.
医学院的选拔过程在识别具备医学成功所需特质和能力的候选人方面起着至关重要的作用。多重迷你面试（MMI）被广泛用于评估沟通、同理心和道德判断等非认知特质。确保其在不同申请人群体中的公平性和有效性对于公平选拔至关重要。
本研究旨在调查：（1）是否有证据支持MMI结构的因子效度；（2）MMI评估的非认知特质在不同性别群体中是否得到一致解释；（3）MMI表现中是否存在与性别相关的差异。
数据来自一所澳大利亚医学院三个选拔周期（2022 - 2024年）的申请人。验证性因子分析（CFA）用于评估MMI表现的维度，测试多个竞争模型以确定最佳拟合结构。然后使用多组CFA评估所选模型在性别上的测量不变性。一旦建立标量不变性，就进行潜在均值比较以检查MMI表现中与性别相关的差异。
CFA表明MMI具有良好的拟合结构，高阶模型成为各队列中最合适的表示形式。测量不变性测试证实了不同性别群体之间的标量不变性，表明男性和女性在MMI非认知特质方面表现相当。确定了显著的潜在均值差异，女性申请人在所有三年中始终优于男性申请人。
结果为MMI在不同性别群体中的因子效度和测量公平性提供了实证支持。然而，基于性别的持续表现差异凸显了继续研究群体差异的潜在来源以及它们如何影响选拔公平性的必要性。这些结果与致力于基于证据和公平选拔过程的医学教育工作者和政策制定者相关。
