Investigating the Relationship between Multiple Mini-Interview Communication Skills Outcomes and First-Year Communication Skills Performance and Reflections in Students at the Ontario Veterinary College
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important outcome for veterinary education is ensuring that graduates can provide an appropriate level of care to patients and clients by demonstrating core competencies such as communication skills. In addition, accreditation requirements dictate the need to assess learning outcomes and may drive the motivation to incorporate relevant and appropriate methods of entry assessments for incoming students. Predicting the success of Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) students based on entry assessment performance has been scantly investigated and can be challenging. Specifically, no research presently exists on predicting DVM students’ first-year performance in relation to communication skills at the time of program entry. Objectives of this exploratory study were to investigate (a) the relationship between communication skills outcomes from multiple mini-interview (MMI) data and first-year academic performance related to communication and (b) the relationship between communication skills outcomes from MMI data and self-reported first-year communication reflections. A retrospective single-class study was conducted. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation statistics, regression models, and paired t-tests to identify relationships among variables. Paired t-tests showed that students felt more prepared to meet second-year expectations over first-year expectations. Spearman’s correlation revealed an association between MMI communication scores and one pre–year 1 survey question related to professionalism. No relationships were observed between MMI communication scores and marks from a self-reflection assignment in a communications course, or grades from a clinical medicine course that included clinical communication. The merit for further exploration of the relationship between communication competencies and student performance is discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".