Prevalence of test accommodations for the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Exam Part I, 2013-2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Previous articles have highlighted the laborious process of acquiring disability accommodations in medical education. We endeavoured to characterize the trends of test accommodations on the MCCQE Part I. Methods: Data was obtained from the Medical Council of Canada on the number of applicants who attained test accommodations on the MCCQE Part I between 2013 and 2021. The number of test takers for the same period was obtained from the Medical Council of Canada's Annual Technical Reports; this data was not publicly available for 2013, 2014, or 2021. Prevalence rates and graphs were produced. Results: The number of test takers who attained test accommodations ranged from 35 to 126 between 2013 and 2021. The percentage of test takers who attained test accommodations ranged from 0.89% to 2.01% between 2015 and 2020. Per correspondence with the Medical Council of Canada, no applicant who provided all required documentation was denied test accommodations during this period. Discussion: The number and rate of test takers attaining test accommodations on the MCCQE Part I have increased substantially during this period. It is unclear whether this increase is due to greater rates of students with disabilities, or a reduction in stigma around using test accommodations.
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 | 0.108 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 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".