The efficacy of medical student selection tools in Australia and New Zealand.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the efficacy of selection tools employed by medical schools for predicting the binary outcomes of completing or not completing medical training and passing or failing a key examination; to investigate the potential usefulness of selection algorithms that do not allow low scores on one tool to be compensated by higher scores on other tools. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from four consecutive cohorts of students (3378 students, enrolled 2007-2010) in five undergraduate medical schools in Australia and New Zealand were analysed. Predictor variables were student scores on selection tools: prior academic achievement, Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test (UMAT), and selection interview. Outcome variables were graduation from the program in a timely fashion, or passing the final clinical skills assessment at the first attempt. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Optimal selection cut-scores determined by discriminant function analysis for each selection tool at each school; efficacy of different selection algorithms for predicting student outcomes. RESULTS: For both outcomes, the cut-scores for prior academic achievement had the greatest predictive value, with medium to very large effect sizes (0.44-1.22) at all five schools. UMAT scores and selection interviews had smaller effect sizes (0.00-0.60). Meeting one or more cut-scores was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of timely graduation in some schools but not in others. CONCLUSIONS: An optimal cut-score can be estimated for a selection tool used for predicting an important program outcome. A "sufficient evidence" selection algorithm, founded on a non-compensatory model, is feasible, and may be useful for some schools.

Medical student psychological distress and academic performance.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of medical student psychological distress on academic performance has not been systematically examined. This study provided an opportunity to closely examine the potential impacts of workplace and study related stress factors on student's psychological distress and their academic performance during their first clinical year. METHODS: This one-year prospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary hospital based medical school in Melbourne, Australia. Students completed a questionnaire at three time points during the year. The questionnaire included the validated Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) and the General Health Questionnaire-28 (GHQ-28), as well as items about sources of workplace stress. Academic outcome scores were aggregated and correlated with questionnaire results. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty six students participated; 126 (94.7%), 102 (76.7%), and 99 (74.4%) at time points one, two, and three, respectively. 33.1% reported psychological distress at time point one, increasing to 47.4% at time point three. There was no correlation between the K10 scores and academic performance. There was weak negative correlation between the GHQ-28 at time point three and academic performance. Keeping up to date with knowledge, need to do well and fear of negative feedback were the most common workplace stress factors. CONCLUSIONS: Poor correlation was noted between psychological distress and academic performance.

Embedding assessment in a simulation skills training program for medical and midwifery students: A pre- and post-intervention evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Simulation-based programs are increasingly being used to teach obstetrics and gynaecology examinations, but it is difficult to establish student learning acquired through them. Assessment may test student learning but its role in learning itself is rarely recognised. We undertook this study to assess medical and midwifery student learning through a simulation program using a pre-test and post-test design and also to evaluate use of assessment as a method of learning. METHODS: The interprofessional simulation education program consisted of a brief pre-reading document, a lecture, a video demonstration and a hands-on workshop. Over a 24-month period, 405 medical and 104 midwifery students participated in the study and were assessed before and after the program. Numerical data were analysed using paired t-test and one-way analysis of variance. Students' perceptions of the role of assessment in learning were qualitatively analysed. RESULTS: The post-test scores were significantly higher than the pre-test (P < 0.001) with improvements in scores in both medical and midwifery groups. Students described the benefit of assessment on learning in preparation of the assessment, reinforcement of learning occurring during assessment and reflection on performance cementing previous learning as a post-assessment effect. CONCLUSION: Both medical and midwifery students demonstrated a significant improvement in their test scores and for most students the examination process itself was a positive learning experience.