PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Background 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. Objective To investigate the evidence base for different selection interview practices in GME. Methods 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). Results 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. Conclusions 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.
摘要：
背景尽管选拔面试是美国研究生医学教育（GME）计划的标准录取实践，最近缺乏关于优化见习面试流程的评论，可靠性低，高成本,和主要的偏见风险。目的探讨GME中不同选择访谈方法的证据基础。方法从成立之初到2022年9月，我们检索了4个文献数据库。两名调查员独立进行标题/摘要筛选，全文回顾,数据提取,和质量评估。分歧是通过讨论调解的。我们对纳入的文章进行了反向参考搜索，以确定其他研究。我们纳入了不同访谈方法的研究和排除文献综述，非GME相关出版物，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，面试格式。我们使用医学教育研究质量工具（MERSQI）评估研究质量。2192项研究的结果,39人（2%）符合我们的纳入标准。根据MERSQI标准，证据基础被评为中等质量低质量。申请人报告了几次持续15到20分钟的一对一面试的偏好，现任学员的采访，和采访，包括只有学员的社交活动。申请人对虚拟面试和面对面面试的看法参差不齐，并报告说虚拟面试节省了成本。多重迷你面试（MMI）比个人面试需要更多的申请人和面试官时间，但证明了结构和预测有效性，并且受到申请人和面试官的青睐。结论基于中等质量的证据，使用MMI，培训面试官,并提前向申请人提供基本计划信息，应考虑GME选拔面试。
