Utility of selection methods for specialist medical training: A BEME (best evidence medical education) systematic review: BEME guide no. 45

Roberts, Chris; Khanna, Priya; Rigby, Louise; Bartle, Emma; Llewellyn, Anthony; Gustavs, Julie; Newton, Libby; Newcombe, James; Davies, Mark W; Thistlethwaite, Jill; Lynam, James

doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1367375

Cited by 49 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 130 publications

(226 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our synthesis of the literature leads us to conclude that there is both a gap in the literature around, and a compelling case for, further theoretical and empirical literature to underpin the development of overall selection philosophies and policies and their enactment (Patterson et al, 2016a;Roberts et al, 2017;Patterson, Cleland, & Cousans, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are at least three approaches to enacting selection policies that involve; individually-focused processes, competency-based frameworks, and a third approach which seeks to encompass factors such as social accountability, widening access/diversity, and workforce planning (Roberts, Khanna, & Rigby, 2017). In individually-focused processes, the capacity for academic success is typically the basis for F o r P e e r -R e v i e w O n l y 3 selection in the majority of medical school and specialty selection systems globally.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

2018 Ottawa consensus statement: Selection and recruitment to the healthcare professions

Patterson¹,

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selection and recruitment into healthcare education and practice is a major area of endeavor for health professional educators. Key insights have emerged to guide further inquiry and influence future policy and practice since the last Ottawa consensus statement on selection (Prideaux et al., 2011). However, much remains to be done, not only in refining the science of selection, but also in considering the opportunities and challenges of translating current research understandings into established practice. This updated consensus statement is based on strong theoretical research evidence and was developed using a multi-stage process. First, a group of international researchers with expertise in selection and recruitment, assessment, curriculum, and educational theory was specially convened to critically appraise the literature and develop a draft consensus statement. Second, the group shared the draft statement with the wider community via a workshop and symposium at the 2018 Ottawa-ICME Joint Conference on the Assessment of Competence in Medicine and the Healthcare Professions, and at the Second International Conference of Selection into the Health Professions. Colleagues from diverse countries and regions actively engaged with these activities face-to-face and through social media. Finally, the statement was refined on the basis of feedback, questions and comments, sent for independent peer review, and further revised. Reflecting the state of the science at the time, the previous consensus (Prideaux et al., 2011) characterised selection as an assessment system and focussed on the quality of different selection methods. In this updated statement, we present the latest research findings on selection methods and, reflecting progression within the field, we also consider potentially more complex issues including: selection policies; methodological concerns (beyond psychometric issues); social accountability, diversity and fairness, workforce shortages in some specialities (e.g. General Practice and Psychiatry) and in certain contexts (e.g. remote and rural working, and emerging countries), globalisation issues, developments in theory, and evaluation frameworks. We conclude with a synthesis of the key issues and a series of recommendations to guide future research and practice and encourage debate between colleagues across the globe. Our findings are

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

2018 Ottawa consensus statement: Selection and recruitment to the healthcare professions

Patterson¹,

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, there may be little relationship between performance on such instruments and academic achievement in the early years of medical undergraduate education . Evidence for the validity of SJTs in evaluating non‐academic traits for medical selection purposes has also been sought by linking the test scores to outcomes that may require a degree of interpersonal competence, such as performance in high‐fidelity simulations of clinical practice in primary care physicians, successful completion of the first stage of postgraduate medical training or performance in the first year as a general practitioner . Cross‐sectional evidence that supports the concept of SJTs measuring constructs relevant to interpersonal functioning also exists, in the form of correlations with multiple mini‐interviews .…”

Section: Traditional Vs Construct‐driven Sjts: Psychometric Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Situational judgement tests for selection: Traditional vs construct‐driven approaches

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A situational judgement test (SJT) is an assessment whereby a candidate is presented with a specific scenario and must evaluate several possible responses to the scenario. The response format can vary but commonly involves ranking potential behavioural responses in order of either appropriateness or perceived effectiveness. Another commonly employed choice format involves a candidate choosing the 'best' and 'worst' behaviours depicted. An example of a Abstract Context: Historically, situational judgement tests (SJTs) have been widely used for personnel selection. Their use in medical selection in Europe is growing, with plans for further expansion into North America and Australasia, in an attempt to measure and select on 'non-academic' personal attributes. However, there is a lack of clarity regarding what such tests actually measure and how they should be designed, scored and implemented within the medical and health education selection process. In particular, the theoretical basis from which such tests are developed will determine the scoring options available, influencing their psychometric properties and, ultimately, their validity. Methods:The aim of this article is to create an awareness of the previous theory and practice that has informed SJT development. We describe the emerging interest in the use of the SJT format to measure specific constructs (eg 'resilience', 'dependability', etc.), drawing on the tradition of 'individual differences' psychology. We compare and contrast this newer 'construct-driven' method with the traditional, pragmatic approach to SJT creation, often employed by organisational psychologists. Making reference to measurement theory, we highlight how the anticipated psychometric properties of traditional vs construct-driven SJTs are likely to differ.Conclusions: Compared to traditional SJTs, construct-driven SJTs have a strong theoretical basis, are uni-rather than multidimensional, and may behave more like personality self-report instruments. Emerging evidence also suggests that construct-driven SJTs have comparable predictive validity for workplace performance, although they may be more prone to 'faking' effects. It is possible that construct-driven approaches prove more appropriate at early stages of medical selection, where candidates have little or no health care work experience. Conversely, traditional SJTs may be more suitable for specialty recruitment, where a range of hypothetical workplace scenarios can be sampled in assessments. S U PP O RTI N G I N FO R M ATI O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section. How to cite this article: Tiffin PA, Paton LW, O'Mara D, MacCann C, Lang JWB, Lievens F. Situational judgement tests for selection: Traditional vs construct-driven approaches. Med Educ. 2020;54:105-115.

show abstract

“…Currently, the ERAS application overwhelmingly focuses on academic metrics . The SLOE is designed to provide a global perspective on an applicant, with writers evaluating the applicant's commitment, differential diagnosis skills, and overall suitability for emergency medicine, among other competencies and skills.…”

Section: Necessitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Stepping Up to the Plate: Emergency Medicine Takes a Swing at Enhancing the Residency Selection Process

Bird

Blomkalns

Deiorio

et al. 2017

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Utility of selection methods for specialist medical training: A BEME (best evidence medical education) systematic review: BEME guide no. 45

Abstract: While much has been gained in understanding the utility of individual selection methods, though the evidence around many of them is equivocal, the underlying theoretical and conceptual frameworks for designing holistic and equitable selection systems are yet to be developed.

Cited by 49 publications

References 130 publications

2018 Ottawa consensus statement: Selection and recruitment to the healthcare professions

2018 Ottawa consensus statement: Selection and recruitment to the healthcare professions

Situational judgement tests for selection: Traditional vs construct‐driven approaches

Stepping Up to the Plate: Emergency Medicine Takes a Swing at Enhancing the Residency Selection Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About