The relative predictive value of undergraduate versus graduate selection tools in two Australian medical schools.

Context: Monash University and the University of Western Australia admit both school-leavers and graduates into their Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) courses. The Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test (UMAT) and the Graduate Medical Schools Admissions Test (GAMSAT) are used for selection, along with an academic score and an interview score. The aim of this study was to compare the relative predictive validity of the selected components in the two entry streams, particularly UMAT versus GAMSAT. Methods: Aggregated scores for course outcomes were calculated in the categories of knowledge, clinical and total scores, at four-time points. A path analysis was conducted based on multivariate regressions with model constraint parameters defined across the outcome variables to investigate change over time. Results: Academic scores were the strongest predictors of knowledge scores and end of course results. Interview scores had a small positive increasing effect, being stronger for clinical than knowledge outcomes. The effect size for GAMSAT was greater than for UMAT. Conclusions: Aptitude tests and interview scores added small but significant incremental predictive value to previous academic achievement. GAMSAT showed larger predictive value on outcomes than UMAT, for which one section (UMAT 3) had a negative effect.

The positive impact of structured teaching in the operating room.

BACKGROUND: A survey of obstetric and gynaecology trainees in Australia found the trainee's opinion of the consultants' teaching ability for laparoscopic procedures and procedures dealing with complications as 'poor' in 21.2% and 23.4% of responses, respectively (Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 49: 84). Surgical caseload per trainee is falling for a variety of reasons. Strategies need to be adopted to enhance the surgical learning experience of trainees in the operating room. AIMS: We describe the use of a structured encounter template to facilitate the teaching of surgery in the operating room and report the response of the trainees to this intervention. METHODS: Trainees attached to a gynaecologic surgery unit all underwent surgical training using a set format based on the surgical encounter template, including briefing, goal setting and intra-operative teaching aims as well as debriefing. Data on the trainees' experience and perception of their learning experience were then collected and analysed as quantitative and qualitative data sets. RESULTS: The trainees reported satisfaction with the use of a structured encounter template to facilitate the surgical teaching in the operating room. Some trainees had not received such clarity of feedback or the opportunity to complete a procedure independently prior to using the structured encounter template. CONCLUSIONS: A structured surgical encounter template based on andragogy principles to focus consultant teaching in the operating room is highly acceptable to obstetric and gynaecology trainees in Australia. Allowing the trainee the opportunity to set objectives and receive feedback empowers the trainee and enhances their educational experience.