Matching of advanced undergraduate medical students' competence profiles with the required competence profiles of their specialty of choice for postgraduate training.

BACKGROUND: Matching between undergraduate students and their chosen specialty has implications for their personal job satisfaction and performance as well as societies' needs regarding health care quality. Knowledge regarding student-specialty fit can help improve students' decisions and detect potential deficiencies in specific competences. In this study, we compare self-assessed competence profiles of medical students close to graduation with the competence profiles of their specialty of choice for postgraduate training. METHODS: Self-assessed competence profiles were collected with the modified requirement-tracking (R-Track) questionnaire from 197 final-year medical students close to graduation in 2022. To determine student-specialty fit, difference scores between students' self-assessed competences and physicians' requirements for specific specialties were calculated across the R-Track's six competence areas "Motivation", "Personality traits", "Social interactive competences", "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities", which were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Mean difference scores across competence areas were calculated and compared between specialties with multivariate analysis of variance. Student-specialty fit was also calculated independent of students' choices. RESULTS: The competence area "Motivation" scored highest for both students and physicians across specialties. However, students' scores were lower than physicians' requirements for "Motivation" as well as "Personality traits" across all specialties. Difference scores for "Social interactive competences" were either close to zero or showed higher scores for students. A similar competence pattern for internal medicine, general medicine, paediatrics, and gynaecology was identified with higher than required student scores for "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities". All other specialties showed higher physicians' requirements for at least one of these competence areas. Independent of students' specialty choice, we found the highest difference score in favour of student scores for general medicine (0.31) and the lowest difference score for internal medicine (-0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Students' competence profiles overall show better fit with person-oriented specialties. "Mental abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", and "Sensory abilities" show higher requirement scores for more technique-oriented specialties. Students interested in such specialties could focus more on basic skill development in undergraduate training or will develop specific skills during residency.

Advanced undergraduate medical students' perceptions of basic medical competences and specific competences for different medical specialties - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Medical graduates should have acquired basic competences that enable them to practice medicine independently as physicians and to enter postgraduate training in any specialty they wish. Little is known about advanced undergraduate medical students' perceptions of basic medical competences needed to start postgraduate training and about specialty-specific competences. This qualitative study aims to identify medical students' perceptions of basic medical competences and specific competence requirements for different specialties. METHODS: In December 2020, sixty-four advanced undergraduate medical students participated in the role of a resident in a competence-based telemedicine training simulating a first day in postgraduate training. After the training, eight focus group interviews were conducted about students' perceptions of basic medical competences and specialty-specific competences using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically according to the six steps of Braun and Clarke. The analysis was carried out by an inductive search for themes, which were deductively assigned to the six competence areas of the requirement-tracking questionnaire (R-Track). RESULTS: Regarding basic medical competences, four R-Track competence areas could be identified as main themes. The students considered 'Social-interactive competences' to be particularly relevant for basic clinical work, including 'Structuring information', 'Tactfulness', and 'Stress resistance'. Students especially emphasized 'Concentration' as an important aspect of the competence area 'Mental abilities'. Among 'Personality traits', 'Honesty' was mentioned most frequently, and students were also aware that 'Expertise' is particularly important for 'Motivation'. For different specialties, some competence areas were newly added to the competences needed for the respective specialty. For surgery, the competence areas 'Sensory abilities' and 'Psychomotor & multitasking abilities' were mentioned anew. 'Sensory abilities' were also newly attributed to radiology. 'Mental abilities' were mentioned as new competence area for psychiatry and internal medicine, while for anaesthesiology, 'Psychomotor & multitasking abilities' were newly added. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced students seem to be well aware of basic competences needed for clinical practice. Good consensus between students and physicians was only found for psychiatry-specific competences. Medical schools should support their students in matching their perceptions of competences needed for specific specialties with specialty-specific requirements for a realistic choice of a specialty for postgraduate training.

Final-year medical students' competence profiles according to the modified requirement tracking questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Undergraduate medical education is supposed to equip medical students with basic competences to select any specialty of their choice for postgraduate training. Medical specialties are characterized by a great diversity of their daily work routines and require different sets of competence facets. This study examines the self-assessed competence profiles of final-year undergraduate medical students and their specialty choice for postgraduate training. Students' profiles, who wish to choose anaesthesiology, internal medicine, or paediatrics, are compared with the physicians' competence profiles from these three disciplines. METHODS: In this study, 148 volunteer final-year undergraduate medical students completed the modified requirement-tracking (R-Track) questionnaire for self-assessment of their competence profiles. The R-Track questionnaire contains 63 competence facets assigned to six areas of competence: "Mental abilities", "Sensory abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", "Social interactive competences", "Motivation", and "Personality traits". The expression of the different competence facets had to be assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Additionally, socio-demographic data and the participants' first choice of a medical speciality for postgraduate education were collected. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) for mean score comparison of subgroups and least significant difference (LSD) tests for post hoc analysis. RESULTS: The competence area with the highest rating was "Motivation" (3.70 ± 0.47) while "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities" received the lowest rating (3.34 ± 0.68). Individual facets of competence ranked from "In need of harmony" (4.36 ± 0.72), followed by "Tactfulness" (4.26 ± 0.64), and "Cooperation/Agreeableness" (4.24 ± 0.53) to "Risk orientation" (2.90 ± 0.92), "Mathematical reasoning" (2.87 ± 1.25), and "Sanctioning" (2.26 ± 0.93). The students' competence profiles showed 100 % congruence with physicians' competence profiles of the postgraduate specialty of their choice for internal medicine, 33.3 % for paediatrics, and 0 % for anaesthesiology. CONCLUSIONS: Undergraduate medical students could define their competence profiles with the modified R-Track questionnaire and compare them with the profile of their desired specialty for postgraduate training to discover possible learning gaps or to detect good specialty matches. A combination of students' competence self-assessment with an external assessment of students' facets of competence could provide curricular planners with useful information how to design learning opportunities for specific facets of competence.

Defining competence profiles of different medical specialties with the requirement-tracking questionnaire - a pilot study to provide a framework for medial students' choice of postgraduate training.

BACKGROUND: The medical specialties are characterised by a great diversity in their daily work which requires different sets of competences. A requirement analysis would help to establish competence profiles of the different medical specialities. The aim of this pilot study was to define competence profiles for individual medical specialties. This could provide a framework as support for medical graduates who wish to choose a medical specialty for their postgraduate training. METHODS: In February 2020, physicians were invited via the State Chamber of Physicians' monthly journal to electronically fill out the requirement tracking (R-Track) questionnaire. It contains 63 aspects assigned to six areas of competence: "Mental abilities", "Sensory abilities", "Psychomotor and multitasking abilities", "Social interactive competences", "Motivation", and "Personality traits". The expression of the different aspects was assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Sociodemographic data and information about the current workplace (hospital or practice) were also collected. RESULTS: In total, 195 practicing physicians from 19 different specialities followed the invitation by the State Chamber of Physicians to participate in this survey. For almost all medical specialties, the competence area "Motivation" reached rank 1. "Psychomotor and multitasking abilities" received high ranks among specialties performing surgical activities, while "Social interactive competences" and "Personality traits" were highly rated by specialties with an intense level of patient-physician-interaction. "Mental abilities" were only rated highly by radiologists (rank 2) and physiologists (rank 3) while "Sensory abilities" were generally rated very low with the expression (rank 4) for anaesthesiology and ENT. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, a first outline of competences profiles for 17 medical specialties were defined. The specific "Motivation" for a medical specialty seemed to play the greatest role for most specialties. This first specialty specific competence framework could provide a first insight into specific competences required by medical specialties and could serve medical graduate as a decision aid when looking for a medical specialty for their postgraduate training.

Cognitive training for robotic surgery: a chance to optimize surgical training? A pilot study.

The rapid rise of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has necessitated an efficient and standardized training curriculum. Cognitive training (CT) can significantly improve skills, such as attention, working memory and problem solving, and can enhance surgical capacity and support RAS training. This pilot study was carried out between 02/2019 and 04/2019. The participants included 33 student volunteers, randomized into 3 groups: group 1 received training using the da Vinci training simulator, group 2 received computer-based cognitive training, and group 3 was the control group without training. Before (T1) and after-training (T2), performance was measured. Additionally, expert ratings and self-evaluations were collected. Subjective evaluations of performance were supplemented by evaluations based on three scales from the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R). In total, 25 probands remained with complete data for further analyses: n = 8 (group 1), n = 7 (group 2) and n = 10 (group 3). There were no significant differences in T1 and T2 among all three groups. The average training gain of group 1 and 2 was 15.87% and 24.6%, respectively, (a restricting condition is the loss of the last training session in group 2). Analyses of semi-structured psychological interviews (SPIs) revealed no significant differences for T1, but in T2, significance occurred at 'self-reflection' for group 2 (F(2.22) = 8.56; p < .005). The efficacy of CT in training highly complex and difficult procedures, such as RAS, is a proven and accepted fact. Further investigation involving higher numbers of training trials (while also being cost effective) should be performed.

Validation of a competence-based assessment of medical students' performance in the physician's role.

BACKGROUND: Assessing competence of advanced undergraduate medical students based on performance in the clinical context is the ultimate, yet challenging goal for medical educators to provide constructive alignment between undergraduate medical training and professional work of physicians. Therefore, we designed and validated a performance-based 360-degree assessment for competences of advanced undergraduate medical students. METHODS: This study was conducted in three steps: 1) Ten facets of competence considered to be most important for beginning residents were determined by a ranking study with 102 internists and 100 surgeons. 2) Based on these facets of competence we developed a 360-degree assessment simulating a first day of residency. Advanced undergraduate medical students (year 5 and 6) participated in the physician's role. Additionally knowledge was assessed by a multiple-choice test. The assessment was performed twice (t1 and t2) and included three phases: a consultation hour, a patient management phase, and a patient handover. Sixty-seven (t1) and eighty-nine (t2) undergraduate medical students participated. 3) The participants completed the Group Assessment of Performance (GAP)-test for flight school applicants to assess medical students' facets of competence in a non-medical context for validation purposes. We aimed to provide a validity argument for our newly designed assessment based on Messick's six aspects of validation: (1) content validity, (2) substantive/cognitive validity, (3) structural validity, (4) generalizability, (5) external validity, and (6) consequential validity. RESULTS: Our assessment proved to be well operationalised to enable undergraduate medical students to show their competences in performance on the higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy. Its generalisability was underscored by its authenticity in respect of workplace reality and its underlying facets of competence relevant for beginning residents. The moderate concordance with facets of competence of the validated GAP-test provides arguments of convergent validity for our assessment. Since five aspects of Messick's validation approach could be defended, our competence-based 360-degree assessment format shows good arguments for its validity. CONCLUSION: According to these validation arguments, our assessment instrument seems to be a good option to assess competence in advanced undergraduate medical students in a summative or formative way. Developments towards assessment of postgraduate medical trainees should be explored.

Medical knowledge and teamwork predict the quality of case summary statements as an indicator of clinical reasoning in undergraduate medical students.

Background: Clinical reasoning refers to a thinking process including medical problem solving and medical decision making skills. Several studies have shown that the clinical reasoning process can be influenced by a number of factors, e.g. context or personality traits, and the results of this thinking process are expressed in case presentation. The aim of this study was to identify factors, which predict the quality of case summary statements as an indicator of clinical reasoning of undergraduate medical students in an assessment simulating the first day of residency. Methods: To investigate factors predicting aspects of clinical reasoning 67 advanced undergraduate medical students participated in the role of a beginning resident in our competence-based assessment, which included a consultation hour, a patient management phase, and a handover. Participants filled out a Post Encounter Form (PEF) to document their case summary statements and other aspects of clinical reasoning. After each phase, they filled out the Strain Perception Questionnaire (STRAIPER) to measure their situation dependent mental strain. To assess medical knowledge the participants completed a 100 questions multiple choice test. To measure stress resistance, adherence to procedures, and teamwork students took part in the Group Assessment of Performance (GAP) test for flight school applicants. These factors were included in a multiple linear regression analysis. Results: Medical knowledge and teamwork predicted the quality of case summary statements as an indicator of clinical reasoning of undergraduate medical students and explained approximately 20.3% of the variance. Neither age, gender, undergraduate curriculum, academic advancement nor high school grade point average of the medical students of our sample had an effect on their clinical reasoning skills. Conclusion: The quality of case summary statements as an indicator of clinical reasoning can be predicted in undergraduate medical students by their medical knowledge and teamwork. Students should be supported in developing abilities to work in a team and to acquire long term knowledge for good case summary statements as an important aspect of clinical reasoning.

Assessing core competences of medical students with a test for flight school applicants.

BACKGROUND: Important competences of physicians regarding patient safety include communication, leadership, stress resistance, adherence to procedures, awareness, and teamwork. Similarly, while selected, prospective flight school applicants are tested for the same set of skills. The aim of our study was to assess these core competences in advanced undergraduate medical students from different medical schools. METHODS: In 2017, 67 medical students (year 5 and 6) from the universities of Hamburg, Oldenburg, and TU Munich, Germany, participated in the verified Group Assessment Performance (GAP)-Test at the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in Hamburg. All participants were rated by DLR assessment observers with a set of empirically derived behavioural checklists. This lists consisted of 6-point rating scales (1: very low occurrence to 6: very high occurrence) and included the competences leadership, teamwork, stress resistance, communication, awareness, and adherence to procedures. Medical students' scores were compared with the results of 117 admitted flight school applicants. RESULTS: Medical students showed significantly higher scores than admitted flight school applicants for adherence to procedures (p < .001, d = .63) and communication (p < .01, d = .62). They reached significantly lower ratings for teamwork (p < .001, d = .77), stress resistance (p < 0.001, d = .70), and awareness (p < .001, d = 1.31). Students in semester 10 showed significantly (p < .02, d = .58) higher scores in domain awareness compared to the final year students. On average, flight school entrance level was not reached by either group for this domain. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced medical students' low results for awareness are alarming as awareness is essential and integrative for clinical reasoning and patient safety. Further studies should elucidate and discuss whether awareness needs to be included in medical student selection or integrated into the curriculum in training units.

Psychometric Personality Differences Between Candidates in Astronaut Selection.

INTRODUCTION: This paper investigates personality traits as potential factors for success in an astronaut selection by comparing personality profiles of unsuccessful and successful astronaut candidates in different phases of the ESA selection procedure. It is further addressed whether personality traits could predict an overall assessment rating at the end of the selection. METHODS: In 2008/2009, ESA performed an astronaut selection with 902 candidates who were either psychologically recommended for mission training (N = 46) or failed in basic aptitude (N = 710) or Assessment Center and interview testing (N = 146). Candidates completed the Temperament Structure Scales (TSS) and the NEO Personality Inventory Revised (NEO-PI-R). RESULTS: Those candidates who failed in basic aptitude testing showed higher levels of Neuroticism (M = 49.8) than the candidates who passed that phase (M = 45.4 and M = 41.6). Additionally, candidates who failed in basic testing had lower levels of Agreeableness (M = 132.9) than recommended candidates (M = 138.1). TSS scales for Achievement (r = 0.19) and Vitality (r = 0.18) showed a significant correlation with the overall assessment rating given by a panel board after a final interview. DISCUSSION: Results indicate that a personality profile similar to Helmreich's "Right Stuff" is beneficial in astronaut selection. Influences of test anxiety on performance are discussed. Mittelstädt JM, Pecena Y, Oubaid V, Maschke P. Psychometric personality differences between candidates in astronaut selection. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2016; 87(11):933-939.

Sex, lies, and strategic interference: the psychology of deception between the sexes.

The desires of one sex can lead to deceptive exploitation by the other sex. Strategic Interference Theory proposes that certain "negative" emotions evolved or have been co-opted by selection, in part, to defend against deception and reduce its negative consequences. In Study 1 (N = 217) Americans reported emotional distress in response to specific forms of deception. Study 2 (N = 200) replicated the results in a German sample. Study 3 (N = 479) assessed Americans' past experiences with deception and conducted additional hypothesis tests using a procedure to control for overall sex differences in upset. Each study supported the hypothesis that emotions track sex-linked forms of strategic interference. Three clusters of sex differences proved robust across studies-emotional upset about resource deception, commitment deception, and sexual deception. We discuss implications for theories of mating and emotion and directions for research based on models of antagonistic coevolution between the sexes.