A preliminary study of the probitive value of personality assessment in medical school admissions within the United States.

BACKGROUND: Allopathic medicine faces a daunting challenge of selecting the best applicants because of the very high applicant / matriculant ratio. The quality of graduates ultimately reflects the quality of medical practice. Alarming recent trends in physician burnout, misconduct and suicide raise questions of whether we are selecting the right candidates. The United States (US) lags far behind the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe in the study of non-cognitive tests in medical school admissions. Although more recently, medical schools in both the UK, Europe and the US have begun to use situational judgement tests such as the Computer-Based Assessment for Sampling Personal Characteristics (CASPer) and the situational judgement test (SJT), recently developed by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and that these tests are, in a sense non-cognitive in nature, direct personality tests per se have not been utilized. We have historically used, in the admissions process within the US, knowledge, reasoning and exam performance, all of which are largely influenced by intelligence and also improved with practice. Personality, though also undoubtedly influenced by intelligence, is fundamentally different and subject to different kinds of measurements. METHODS: A popular personality measurement used over the past two decades within the US in business and industry, but not medical school has been the Neo Personality Inventory - Revised (NEO-PI-R) Test. This test has not been utilized regularly in allopathic medicine probably because of the paucity of exploratory retrospective and validating prospective studies. The hypothesis which we tested was whether NEO-PI-R traits exhibited consistency between two institutions and whether their measurements showed probative value in predicting academic performance. RESULTS: Our retrospective findings indicated both interinstitutional consistencies and both positive and negative predictive values for certain traits whose correlative strengths exceeded traditional premed metrics: medical college admission test (MCAT) scores, grade point average (GPA), etc. for early academic performance. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory studies should catalyze larger and more detailed confirmatory studies designed to validate the importance of personality traits not only in predicting early medical school performance but also later performance in one's overall medical career.

The virtues of the virtual medical school interview.

The COVID-19 pandemic has mandated the use of virtual interactions in medical school. Although this falls mainly in the area of didactic instruction, of necessity, it has extended to the critical Admissions Process and the Medical School Interview itself. The California University of Science and Medicine (CUSM) with their flipped classroom approach had previously entered a virtual space of instruction even before COVID-19. Because CUSM was, in a sense, already committed to 'virtual' education, in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, CUSM focused not on what it might lose but what it might gain and what their applicants to medical school might gain with the virtual format. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to initially compare the Virtual Interview with the traditional On-Campus (In-Person) Interview during the hybrid 2020 year when the COVID-19 pandemic began. The Virtual Interview was patterned after the On-Campus Interview with some modifications. The same faculty conducted both interviews. A number of inherent advantages of the Virtual Interview surfaced to these faculty interviewers based on their subjective observations and conclusions. The overall interviewee satisfaction with the Virtual Interview was very positive based on their subjective observations and conclusions. The objective data from the Virtual Interviews compared to the On-Campus Interviews in the hybrid year resulted in a greater percentage of both offers of acceptance (p = .001) and matriculations (p = .001). In order to strengthen our initial observations, we expanded our study to include 2 pre-COVID-19 years (2018, 2019) of exclusively On-Campus interviews (n = 743) and 1 additional COVID-19 year (2021) of exclusively Virtual Interviews (n = 529). In this expanded study, interviewee demographics were not confounding and the Virtual Interview gave rise to overall greater interviewee satisfaction (p = .001), a trend to greater interviewer satisfaction and a greater percentage of both offers of acceptance (p = .047) and matriculations (p = .036).