Cargando…

Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult

INTRODUCTION: The Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) appendices provide a program director with comparative performance for a student’s academic and professional attributes, but they are frequently absent or incomplete. METHODS: We reviewed MSPEs from applicants to our emergency medicine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boysen-Osborn, Megan, Yanuck, Justin, Mattson, James, Toohey, Shannon, Wray, Alisa, Wiechmann, Warren, Lahham, Shadi, Langdorf, Mark I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226763/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28116008
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2016.10.32233
_version_ 1782493707945115648
author Boysen-Osborn, Megan
Yanuck, Justin
Mattson, James
Toohey, Shannon
Wray, Alisa
Wiechmann, Warren
Lahham, Shadi
Langdorf, Mark I.
author_facet Boysen-Osborn, Megan
Yanuck, Justin
Mattson, James
Toohey, Shannon
Wray, Alisa
Wiechmann, Warren
Lahham, Shadi
Langdorf, Mark I.
author_sort Boysen-Osborn, Megan
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) appendices provide a program director with comparative performance for a student’s academic and professional attributes, but they are frequently absent or incomplete. METHODS: We reviewed MSPEs from applicants to our emergency medicine residency program from 134 of 136 (99%) U.S. allopathic medical schools, over two application cycles (2012–13, 2014–15). We determined the degree of compliance with each of the five recommended MSPE appendices. RESULTS: Only three (2%) medical schools were compliant with all five appendices. The medical school information page (MSIP, appendix E) was present most commonly (85%), followed by comparative clerkship performance (appendix B, 82%), overall performance (appendix D, 59%), preclinical performance (appendix A, 57%), and professional attributes (appendix C, 18%). Few schools (7%) provided student-specific, comparative professionalism assessments. CONCLUSION: Medical schools inconsistently provide graphic, comparative data for their students in the MSPE. Although program directors (PD) value evidence of an applicant’s professionalism when selecting residents, medical schools rarely provide such useful, comparative professionalism data in their MSPEs. As PDs seek to evaluate applicants based on academic performance and professionalism, rather than standardized testing alone, medical schools must make MSPEs more consistent, objective, and comparative.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5226763
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52267632017-01-23 Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult Boysen-Osborn, Megan Yanuck, Justin Mattson, James Toohey, Shannon Wray, Alisa Wiechmann, Warren Lahham, Shadi Langdorf, Mark I. West J Emerg Med Original Research INTRODUCTION: The Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) appendices provide a program director with comparative performance for a student’s academic and professional attributes, but they are frequently absent or incomplete. METHODS: We reviewed MSPEs from applicants to our emergency medicine residency program from 134 of 136 (99%) U.S. allopathic medical schools, over two application cycles (2012–13, 2014–15). We determined the degree of compliance with each of the five recommended MSPE appendices. RESULTS: Only three (2%) medical schools were compliant with all five appendices. The medical school information page (MSIP, appendix E) was present most commonly (85%), followed by comparative clerkship performance (appendix B, 82%), overall performance (appendix D, 59%), preclinical performance (appendix A, 57%), and professional attributes (appendix C, 18%). Few schools (7%) provided student-specific, comparative professionalism assessments. CONCLUSION: Medical schools inconsistently provide graphic, comparative data for their students in the MSPE. Although program directors (PD) value evidence of an applicant’s professionalism when selecting residents, medical schools rarely provide such useful, comparative professionalism data in their MSPEs. As PDs seek to evaluate applicants based on academic performance and professionalism, rather than standardized testing alone, medical schools must make MSPEs more consistent, objective, and comparative. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2017-01 2016-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5226763/ /pubmed/28116008 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2016.10.32233 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Boysen-Osborn et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Original Research
Boysen-Osborn, Megan
Yanuck, Justin
Mattson, James
Toohey, Shannon
Wray, Alisa
Wiechmann, Warren
Lahham, Shadi
Langdorf, Mark I.
Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title_full Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title_fullStr Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title_full_unstemmed Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title_short Who to Interview? Low Adherence by U.S. Medical Schools to Medical Student Performance Evaluation Format Makes Resident Selection Difficult
title_sort who to interview? low adherence by u.s. medical schools to medical student performance evaluation format makes resident selection difficult
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5226763/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28116008
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2016.10.32233
work_keys_str_mv AT boysenosbornmegan whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT yanuckjustin whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT mattsonjames whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT tooheyshannon whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT wrayalisa whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT wiechmannwarren whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT lahhamshadi whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult
AT langdorfmarki whotointerviewlowadherencebyusmedicalschoolstomedicalstudentperformanceevaluationformatmakesresidentselectiondifficult