Cross-sectional evaluation of an asynchronous Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) in selection to health professions training programmes with ten principles for fairness built-in
Callwood, A.; Harris, J.; Gillam, L.; Roberts, S.; Kubacki, A.; Tiffin, P.
Show abstract
ObjectivesEnsuring equity, inclusivity, and diversity in health professions selection is an ethical and practical imperative. We have built the first known online asynchronous Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI). We aimed to explore psychometric properties for all users with sub-group analysis by key characteristics, acceptability, and usability. Design, setting, participantsCross-discipline multi-method evaluation with applicants to Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedic Science under-graduate programmes from one UK university (2021/2022). Primary, secondary outcome measuresPsychometric properties (internal consistency, construct validity, dimensionality) were assessed using Cronbachs alpha (), parallel analysis (PA), Schmid-Leiman transformation and ordinal confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Usability and acceptability were evaluated using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. MethodsThe system was configured in a seven question four-minute MMI. Applicants video-recorded their answers which were later assessed by interviewers and scores summed. Applicants and interviewers completed online evaluation questionnaires. ResultsPerformance data from 712 applicants determined good-excellent reliability for the asynchronous MMI assessment (mean 0.72) with similar results across sub-groups (gender, age, disability/support needs, UK/non-UK). Parallel analysis and factor analysis results suggested that there were seven factors relating to the MMI questions with an underlying general factor that explained the variance in observed candidate responses. A confirmatory factor analysis testing a seven-factor hierarchical model showed an excellent fit to the data (Confirmatory Fit Index =0.99), Tucker Lewis Index =0.99, RMSE=0.034). Applicants (n=210) viewed the flexibility, relaxed environment, and cost savings advantageous. Interviewers (n=65) reported the system intuitive, flexible with >70% time saved compared to face-to-face interviews. Reduced personal communication was cited as the principle disadvantage. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the asynchronous MMI is reliable, time-efficient, fair, and acceptable. In the absence of any known precedent, these internationally applicable, cross discipline insights inform the future configuration of online interviews where building-in principles for fairness are relatively straight forward to implement. Study strengths and limitations O_LIThe theoretical approach aligned with an iterative process necessary to design a new technology to reduce bias. C_LIO_LIThe large sample enabled us to assess psychometric properties with sub-group analysis for the first time in this context. C_LIO_LIThe study provides perspectives from one large site; a necessary step to inform a planned international multi-site evaluation. C_LIO_LIThe multi-method design provided insights necessary to embed fairness into online selection approaches in the absence of best practice guidance. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Introducing the 4Ps Model of Transitioning to Distance Learning: a convergent mixed methods study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic 96%
- Evaluating user experience with immersive technology in simulation-based education: a modified Delphi study with qualitative analysis 96%
- Learn!Bio - A time-limited cross-sectional study on biosciences students' pathway to resilience during and post the Covid-19 pandemic at an UK university from 2020-2023 and insights into future teaching approaches. 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Improving capacity for advanced training in obstetric surgery: Evaluation of a blended learning approach 95%
- COVIDReady2 Study Protocol: Cross-sectional Survey of Medical Student Volunteering and Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom 94%
- Effect of introducing interprofessional education concepts on students of various healthcare disciplines in the United Arab Emirates 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating a first fully automated interview grounded in Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) methodology: results from a feasibility study 99%
- Perceptions on undertaking regular asymptomatic self-testing for COVID-19 using lateral flow tests: A qualitative study of university students and staff 95%
- Ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom: UK-REACH ethico-legal research, qualitative research on healthcare workers’ experiences, and stakeholder engagement protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Benefits and Challenges of Using Virtual Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: From Key Lessons to a Framework for Implementation 95%
- Defining Destigmatizing Design Guidelines for Use in Sexual Health-Related Digital Technologies: A Delphi Study 93%
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- The development of a World Health Organization transdiagnostic chatbot intervention for distressed adolescents and young adults 93%
- Leveraging Telemedicine To Improve Mnch Uptake In Kenya: A Community- Based Hybrid Model 93%
- Implementing Home-Based Digital Health in Rural Canada: A Scoping Review 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.