Evaluating a first fully automated interview grounded in Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) methodology: results from a feasibility study

Author:

Callwood AlisonORCID,Gillam LeeORCID,Christidis Angelos,Doulton Jia,Harris Jenny,Coleman Marianne,Kubacki Angela,Tiffin PaulORCID,Roberts Karen,Tarmey DrewORCID,Dalton Doris,Valentin VirginiaORCID

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesGlobal, Covid-driven restrictions around face-to-face interviews for healthcare student selection have forced admissions staff to rapidly adopt adapted online systems before supporting evidence is available. We have developed, what we believe is, the first fully automated interview grounded in Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) methodology. This study aimed to explore test re-test reliability, acceptability and usability of the system.Design, setting and participantsmixed-methods feasibility study in Physician Associate (PA) programmes from two UK and one US university during 2019 - 2020.Primary, secondary outcomesFeasibility measures (test retest reliability acceptability and usability) were assessed using intra-class correlation (ICC), descriptive statistics, thematic and content analysis.MethodsVolunteers took (T1), then repeated (T2), the automated MMI, with a seven-day interval (+/− 2) then completed an evaluation questionnaire. Admissions staff participated in focus group discussions.ResultsSixty-two students and seven admission staff participated; 34 students and four staff from UK and 28 students and three staff from US universities.Good-excellent test-retest reliability was observed with T1 and T2 ICC between 0.62-0.81 (p<0.001) when assessed by individual total scores (range 80.6-119), station total scores 0.6-0.91, p<0.005, individual site (all ICC≥ 0.76 p<0.001) and mean test retest across sites 0.82 p<0.001 (95% CI 0.7-0.9).Admissions staff reported potential to reduce resource costs and bias through a more objective screening tool for pre-selection or to replace some MMI stations in a ‘hybrid model’. Maintaining human interaction through ‘touch points’ was considered essential.Users positively evaluated the system, stating it was intuitive with an accessible interface. Concepts chosen for dynamic probing needed to be appropriately tailored.ConclusionThese preliminary findings suggest that the system is reliable, generating consistent scores for candidates and is acceptable to end-users provided human touchpoints are maintained. Thus, there is evidence for the potential of such an automated system to augment healthcare student selection processes.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3