MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138754693

The acceptability of the multiple mini interview for resident selection.

2009· article· en· W2138754693 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterviewThematic analysisMedical educationContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Family medicineGraduate medical educationPsychologyCognitive interviewMEDLINEDescriptive statisticsMedicineAccreditationQualitative researchCognitionPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study describes and assesses the acceptability of the multiple mini interview (MMI) to both international medical graduate (IMG) applicants to family medicine residency training in Alberta, Canada, and also interviewers for Alberta's International Medical Graduate Program (AIMGP), an Alberta Health and Wellness government initiative designed to help integrate IMGs into Canadian residency training. IMGs are physicians who completed undergraduate medical education outside of Canada and the United States. IMGs who live in the Canadian province of Alberta may obtain a limited number of government-funded positions for residency training by applying to AIMGP. METHODS: A literature review and faculty and medical community consultation informed the development of a 12-station MMI designed to identify non-cognitive characteristics associated with professionalism potential. Clinical scenarios were developed by family physicians and medical educators. Applicant and interviewer posttest acceptability was assessed using surveys. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis and thematic description. RESULTS: Our research demonstrates evidence for applicant and interviewer acceptability of the MMI. Interviewers reported high levels of satisfaction with the time-restricted process that addressed multiple situations pertinent to the Canadian family medicine context. Applicants and interviewers were each satisfied that 8 minutes was enough time at each station. Applicants reported that they felt the process was free from gender and cultural bias. Interviewers agreed that this MMI was a fair assessment of potential for family medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized residency selection interviews can be adapted to measure professionalism potential characteristics important to family medicine in ways that are acceptable to IMG applicants and interviewers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it