The change from UMAT to UCAT for undergraduate medical school applicants: impact on selection outcomes

Abstract

Objectives To assess whether the change from the Undergraduate Medical and Health Sciences Admissions Test (UMAT; 1991–2019) to the University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT) for the 2020 New South Wales undergraduate medical degree intake was associated with changes in the impact of sex, socio‐economic status and remoteness of residence, and professional coaching upon selection for interview. Design, setting, participants Cross‐sectional study of applicants for the three NSW undergraduate medical programs for entry in 2019 (4114 applicants) or 2020 (4270); 703 people applied for both intakes. Applicants selected for interview were surveyed about whether they had received professional coaching for the selection test. Main outcome measures Scores on the three sections of the UMAT (2019 entry cohort) and the five subtests of the UCAT (2020 entry); total UMAT and UCAT scores. Results Mean scores for UMAT 1 and 3 and for all four UCAT cognitive subtests were higher for men than women; the differences were statistically significant after adjusting for age, socio‐economic status, and remoteness. The effect size for sex was 0.24 (95% CI, 0.18–0.30) for UMAT total score, 0.38 (95% CI, 0.32–0.44) for UCAT total score. For the 2020 intake, 2303 of 4270 applicants (53.9%) and 476 of 1074 interviewees (44.3%) were women. The effect size for socio‐economic status was 0.47 (95% CI, 0.39–0.54) for UMAT, 0.43 (95% CI, 0.35–0.50) for UCAT total score; the effect size for remoteness was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.45–0.63) for UMAT, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.39–0.58) for UCAT total score. The impact of professional coaching on UCAT performance was not statistically significant among those accepted for interview. Conclusions Women and people from areas outside major cities or of lower socio‐economic status perform less well on the UCAT than other applicants. Reviewing the test and applicant quotas may be needed to achieve selection equity.

Evaluation of Situational Judgment Tests in student selection in Indonesia and the impact on diversity issues

“…For example, most medical schools in the UK and in Australia use the UCAT (University Clinical Aptitude Test) for early screening in admissions. UCAT comprises both an SJT and four cognitive ability tests [ 5 , 14 ]. In general, results show that males tend to outperform females on the cognitive ability tests and females outperform males in the SJT; which to some extent ‘levels the field’ regarding gender differences as part of medical school admissions [ 5 ].…”

Is the UCAT appropriate for selecting undergraduate medical students?

“…The findings of Griffin and her colleagues 12 should ring alarm bells for medical schools. The UCAT clearly favours some groups of applicants.…”

“…The authors of the research study reported in this issue of the MJA 12 compared data for 2018 intake applicants, the last to sit the UMAT, with those for the 2019 intake, the first to sit the UCAT. They found that male applicants, and those from higher socio‐economic status areas and major cities, performed better on both the UMAT and UCAT than other applicants.…”

“…Finally, in light of the findings of Griffin and colleagues 12 — not unexpected given the content of the UCAT — one important question needs to be answered: does the test actually measure the qualities that medical schools wish for future doctors? The inclusion of “clinical” in “UCAT” suggests that it does.…”

It is all about who you Know: Disparities in Opportunity

“…1 Though COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease, other rare presentations like acute abdomen, thromboembolism, cardiomyopathy and cerebrovascular events have been reported. 2 We report a unique case of COVID-19-associated vestibular neuritis in a healthcare worker (HCW).…”