College preparation for a medical career in the United States.

PURPOSE: A college degree is required to enter medical school in the United States. A remarkably high percentage of students entering college have pre-medical aspirations but relatively few end up as medical students. As an "applied science", education about medicine is usually thought to be beyond the purview of a liberal arts curriculum. Students therefore receive little education about a medical career, or information about the many alternative careers in health science. Instead, they take courses for Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) preparation and medical school application prerequisites in biology, chemistry, physics, and math. These classes give them little insight into a real medical career. The current report considers this mismatch between student needs in health science and available resources in colleges across the United States. METHODS: A Collective Case Series framework was used to obtain qualitative data. Key informant interviews were requested from a convenience sample of representatives from 20 colleges, with six colleges providing extensive data. Three institutions collected data specifically on students who matriculated college interested in a career as a physician. RESULTS: At these schools, one-half to one-quarter of students who said they were interested in medicine at the beginning of college ended up not applying to medical school. At each of the six schools, we saw a wide range of generally sparse academic and professional advising involvement and a very limited number of classes that discussed concepts directly related to careers in health science. CONCLUSIONS: Looking at this data, we provide a novel conceptual model as a potential testable solution to the problem of an underexposed and unprepared student population interested in medicine. This includes a brief series of courses intended to inform students about what a career in medicine would fully entail to help foster core competencies of empathy, compassion and resilience.

Evaluating a Situational Judgment Test for Use in Medical School Admissions: Two Years of AAMC PREview Exam Administration Data.

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Professional Readiness Exam (PREview) scores and other admissions data, group differences in mean PREview scores, and whether adding a new assessment tool affected the volume and composition of applicant pools. METHOD: Data from the 2020 and 2021 PREview exam administrations were analyzed. Two U.S. schools participated in the PREview pilot in 2020 and 6 U.S. schools participated in 2021. PREview scores were paired with data from the American Medical College Application Service (undergraduate grade point averages [GPAs], Medical College Admission Test [MCAT] scores, race, and ethnicity) and participating schools (interview ratings). RESULTS: Data included 19,525 PREview scores from 18,549 unique PREview examinees. Correlations between PREview scores and undergraduate GPAs ( r = .16) and MCAT scores ( r = .29) were small and positive. Correlations between PREview scores and interview ratings were also small and positive, ranging between .09 and .14 after correcting for range restriction. Small group differences in mean PREview scores were observed between White and Black or African American and White and Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish origin examinees. The addition of the PREview exam did not substantially change the volume or composition of participating schools' applicant pools. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the PREview exam measures knowledge of competencies that are distinct from those measured by other measures used in medical school admissions. Observed group differences were smaller than group differences observed with traditional academic assessments and evaluations. The addition of the PREview exam did not substantially change the overall volume of applications or the proportions of out-of-state, underrepresented in medicine, or lower socioeconomic status applicants. While more research is needed, these results suggest the PREview exam may provide unique information to the admissions process without adversely affecting applicant pools.

Association of applicant demographic factors with medical school acceptance.

BACKGROUND: Medical school acceptance rates in the United States (US) have been lower for applicants who identify as Underrepresented-in-Medicine (UiM) compared to non-UiM applicants. The gap between UiM and no-UiM groups is narrowing in recent years. Less well-studied are associations of acceptance decisions with family income and parental education. This study's purpose is to evaluate the relationships between medical school acceptance and family income, parental education status, racial/ethnic background, Grade Point Average (GPA), Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score, and participation in extracurricular activities. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of first-time US medical school applicants between 2017 and 2020. Acceptance rates for first-time applicants were calculated for first-generation (FG), low-income (LI), and UiM applicants. Associations of these attributes with MCAT scores, science GPAs, and seven categories of extracurricular activities were evaluated. Regression analyses estimated associations between acceptance to medical school with all variables with and without interaction terms (FG*URM, LI*URM, FG*LI). RESULTS: The overall acceptance rate for first-time applicants from 2017-2020 was 45.3%. The acceptance rates among FG, LI and UiM applicants were 37.9%, 39.6% and 44.2%, respectively. In univariable logistic regression analyses, acceptance was negatively associated with being FG (OR: 0.68, CI: 0.67-0.70), LI (OR: 0.70, CI: 0.69-0.72), and UiM (OR: 0.95, CI: 0.93-0.97). In multivariable regression, acceptance was most strongly associated with science GPA (OR: 7.15, CI: 6.78-7.54 for the highest quintile) and UiM (OR: 5.56, CI: 5.48-5.93) status and MCAT score (OR: 1.19, CI: 1.18-1.19), FG (OR: 1.14, CI: 1.10-1.18), and most extracurricular activities. Including interaction terms revealed a negative association between acceptance and LI (OR:0.90, CI: 0.87-0.94) and FG was no longer significant (OR:1.10, CI:0.96-1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Collectively these results suggest medical school admissions committees may be relying on holistic admission practices. While MCAT and GPA scores continue to predict acceptance, individuals from racially and ethnically UiM backgrounds have favorable odds of acceptance when controlling for MCAT and GPA. However, these positive associations were not seen for low-income and first-generation applicants. Additional preparation for college and the MCAT for these latter groups may help further diversify the medical profession.

Does Masking MCAT Scores During Admissions Increase Equity?

PURPOSE: To improve admissions process equity, the Uniformed Services University masked Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores at or above the 51st percentile to admissions committee members. This policy was aimed at improving admissions rates for applicants in 2 priority groups: those from races and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine (URM) and those from lower socioeconomic status, represented by first-generation college (FGC) graduates. METHOD: All applicants invited to interview were included: 1,624 applicants from admissions years 2014-2016 before MCAT score masking and 1,668 applicants from admissions years 2018-2020 during MCAT score masking. Logistic regression determined admissions likelihood before and during masking. Independent sample t tests compared average admissions committee scores for all applicants and for those in priority groups. Linear regression determined the weight of MCAT scores on admissions committee scores. RESULTS: Despite there being more priority group applicants during MCAT score masking, the admissions likelihood for an individual priority group applicant decreased during this period. URM applicants had an odds ratio of 0.513 for acceptance during MCAT score masking compared to before masking, and FGC applicants had an odds ratio of 0.695. Masking significantly reduced mean admissions committee scores, which decreased approximately twice as much for priority group applicants as for nonpriority group applicants (0.96 points vs 0.51 points). These score decreases were highest for priority group applicants with MCAT scores above the 67th percentile. Masking reduced the weight of MCAT scores; 10.9% of admissions committee score variance was explained by MCAT scores before masking and only 1.2% during masking. CONCLUSIONS: Despite known disparities in MCAT scores with respect to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, admissions decisions in this study were more equitable when MCAT scores were included. While masking MCAT scores reduced the influence of the exam in admissions decisions, it also reduced admissions rates for URM and FGC applicants.

Increasing Diversity in the Physician Workforce: Pathway Programs and Predictive Analytics.

PROBLEM: Lack of diversity in the physician workforce has well-documented negative impacts on health outcomes. Evidence supports the use of pathway or pipeline programs to recruit underrepresented in medicine students. However, data on how a pathway program should deliver instruction are lacking. This report describes a multiyear project to build such a system with the goal of increasing diversity within medical school cohorts and ultimately the physician workforce. APPROACH: In the 2015-2016 academic year, the Ponce Health Sciences University started a 3-phase project to create a data-driven medical school feeder system by coupling a pathway program with predictive analytics. Phase 1 launched the pathway program. Phase 2 developed and validated a predictive model that estimates United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 performance. Phase 3 is underway and focuses on adoption, implementation, and support. OUTCOMES: Data analysis compared 2 groups of students (pathway vs direct) across specific factors, including Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score, undergraduate grade point average (GPA), first-generation status, and Step 1 exam performance. Statistically significant differences were found between the 2 groups on the MCAT exam and undergraduate GPA; however, no significant differences were found between groups for first-generation status and performance on the Step 1 exam. This finding supports the authors' hypothesis that although pathway students have significantly lower mean MCAT exam scores compared with direct students, pathway students perform just as well on the USMLE Step 1 exam. NEXT STEPS: Next steps include expanding the project to another campus, adding more socioeconomic status and first-generation data, and identifying best curricular predictors. The authors recommend that medical school programs use pathway programs and predictive analytics to create a more data-centered approach to accepting students with the goal of increasing physician workforce diversity.

Self-Reported Disadvantage in Medical School Admissions: A Call to Review, Revise, and Further Advance Holistic Review.

PURPOSE: This study examined how applicants interpret the self-reported disadvantaged (SRD) question in the American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS) application. METHOD: Data from 129,262 applicants who applied through AMCAS from 2017 through 2019 were used, including financial and family history, demographic characteristics, and work status and residence. Fifteen applicants from the 2020 and 2021 AMCAS cycles were interviewed about their experiences with the SRD question. RESULTS: Large effects were found for SRD applicants with fee assistance waivers ( h = 0.89), Pell grants ( h = 1.21), state or federal aid ( h = 1.10), and parents with less education ( h = 0.98) and non-SRD applicants with a large proportion of their education paid by family ( d = 1.03). Another large difference was found for reported family income distribution (73% of SRD applicants reporting family income < $50,000 vs 15% of non-SRD applicants). More SRD applicants were Black or Hispanic (26% vs 16% and 5% vs 5%), Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients (11% vs 2%), born outside the United States (32% vs 16%), and raised in a medically underserved area (60% vs 14%). There was a moderate effect for first-generation to college SRD applicants ( h = 0.61). SRD applicants had lower Medical College Admission Test scores ( d = 0.62) and overall and science grade point averages ( d = 0.50 and 0.49, respectively) but no meaningful differences in acceptance or matriculation rates. The interviews identified 5 themes: (1) unclear disadvantage definition; (2) different perceptions of disadvantage and overcoming challenges or obstacles ; (3) identification as disadvantaged or not; (4) SRD essay content; and (5) concerns about lack of transparency in how the SRD question is used in admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Revising the SRD question by including context, phrasing, and instructions for broader experience categories might be beneficial because of lack of transparency and understanding.

Blinding of Admissions Committee to MCAT Scores: Is There a Difference in Subsequent Medical School Performance Between Cohorts?

BACKGROUND: The Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) is designed to inform members of the admissions committee about applicants' academic readiness for medical school. Although previous work has shown that MCAT scores have some predictive validity evidence for a variety of medical student outcomes, there is also a concern that the MCAT is overly emphasized by admissions committees, which may, for example, affect matriculant diversity. The purpose of this study was to understand whether deemphasizing the MCAT by blinding committee members to applicants' specific scores has resulted in matriculants with different pre-clerkship and clerkship performance. METHOD: The Admissions Committee from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) created a policy to blind admissions committee members to MCAT scores. The MCAT-blinded policy was implemented for classes of 2022 to 2024. This MCAT-blinded cohort's performance was compared with a previous cohort, classes of 2018 to 2020. Two analyses of covariance were performed to test for differences in the pre-clerkship and clerkship module scores. Undergraduate grade point average (uGPA) and MCAT percentile for matriculants were included as covariates. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in either pre-clerkship or clerkship performance between the MCAT-revealed and MCAT-blinded cohorts. CONCLUSION: This study found similar medical school performance between the MCAT-blinded and MCAT-revealed cohorts. The research team plans to continuously follow these two cohorts to understand their performance further down their education path, including step 1 and step 2 examinations.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Barriers Faced by Medical College Admission Test Examinees and Their Association With Medical School Application and Matriculation.

Importance: There has been disappointing progress in enrollment of medical students from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine, including American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic students. Barriers that may influence students interested in medicine are understudied. Objective: To examine racial and ethnic differences in barriers faced by students taking the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used survey data (surveys administered between January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018) from MCAT examinees linked with application and matriculation data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Data analyses were performed from November 1, 2021, to January 31, 2023. Main Variables and Outcomes: Main outcomes were medical school application and matriculation. Key independent variables reflected parental educational level, financial and educational barriers, extracurricular opportunities, and interpersonal discrimination. Results: The sample included 81 755 MCAT examinees (0.3% American Indian or Alaska Native, 21.3% Asian, 10.1% Black, 8.0% Hispanic, and 60.4% White; 56.9% female). There were racial and ethnic differences in reported barriers. For example, after adjustment for demographic characteristics and examination year, 39.0% (95% CI, 32.3%-45.8%) of American Indian or Alaska Native examinees, 35.1% (95% CI, 34.0%-36.2%) of Black examinees, and 46.6% (95% CI, 45.4%-47.9%) of Hispanic examinees reported having no parent with a college degree compared with 20.4% (95% CI, 20.0%-20.8%) of White examinees. After adjustment for demographic characteristics and examination year, Black examinees (77.8%; 95% CI, 76.9%-78.7%) and Hispanic examinees (71.3%; 95% CI, 70.2%-72.4%) were less likely than White examinees (80.2%; 95% CI, 79.8%-80.5%) to apply to medical school. Black examinees (40.6%; 95% CI, 39.5%-41.7%) and Hispanic examinees (40.2%; 95% CI, 39.0%-41.4%) were also less likely than White examinees (45.0%; 95% CI, 44.6%-45.5%) to matriculate at medical school. Examined barriers were associated with a lower likelihood of medical school application and matriculation (eg, examinees having no parent with a college degree had lower odds of applying [odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.61-0.69] and matriculating [odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.59-0.66]). Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities in application and matriculation were largely accounted for by differences in these barriers. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of MCAT examinees, American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic students reported lower parental educational levels, greater educational and financial barriers, and greater discouragement from prehealth advisers than White students. These barriers may deter groups underrepresented in medicine from applying to and matriculating at medical school.

An Evaluation of Nonacademic Predictors of Success in a Doctor of Pharmacy Program.

Objective. Pharmacy programs have struggled to predict who will be successful in their programs based solely on cognitive skills. The primary objective of this study was to determine which, if any, nonacademic factors are associated with on-time progression within the school of pharmacy curriculum.Methods. A survey was developed and offered to all Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Jerry H. Hodge School of Pharmacy students in fall 2020. This survey included questions to collect demographic data and incorporated four validated questionnaires: the Grit-Grid, the Academic Pharmacy Resilience Scale (APRS-16), the Cohen Perceived Stress Scale (CPSS), and the Turkish Time Management Questionnaire (TTMQ).Results. Completed surveys were submitted by 213 students out of 569 (37.4% response rate). On-time progression rate was calculated separately for each class. Through binary logistic regression, we found that on-time progression was significantly associated with prepharmacy grade point average >3.20, high school Grit-Grid score >0.9, APRS-16 score >35, and CPSS score >34. Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT) composite scores and admissions committee rubric scores were not associated with on-time progression.Conclusion. Based on the results of this study, it may be reasonable to implement the Grit-Grid, APRS-16, and the CPSS in the admissions process to help determine the most appropriate candidates for our program or use them as screening tools for incoming students to identify who may be at academic risk. However, these factors need to be validated in pharmacy programs in other private and public universities before widespread adoption can be condoned.

Adaptação acadêmica em universitários / Academic adaptation in university students / Adaptación académica en estudiantes universitários

O objetivo do estudo foi investigar o impacto das variáveis habilidades sociais, resolução de problemas sociais, automonitoria, autoeficácia e coping na adaptação acadêmica em estudantes de instituições de ensino superior públicas e privadas. Participaram 637 estudantes de ambos os sexos, sendo 36,5% (115) homens de instituições públicas e 22,3% (72) de instituições privadas, com idade variando entre 18 e 38 anos (M=24,7; DP=6,3), de diferentes graduações. Foram utilizados o Inventário de Resolução de Problemas Sociais, o Inventário de Habilidades Sociais, a Escala de Automonitoria, a Escala de Autoeficácia Acadêmica de Estudantes do Ensino Superior, o Inventário de Estratégias de Coping e o Questionário de Vivências Acadêmicas-reduzido. A autoeficácia na gestão acadêmica (40,9%) e a autoafirmação na expressão de afeto positivo (13,7%) apresentaram maior impacto para os estudantes de instituições públicas e privadas, podendo contribuir com possíveis intervenções no processo de adaptação ao ensino superior. Pesquisas prospectivas podem investigar questões relacionadas a dados sociodemográficos.(AU)

The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of the variables Social Skills, Resolution of Social Problems, Self-monitoring, Self-efficacy and Coping on Academic Adaptation in students from public and private higher education institutions. 637 students of both sexes participated, being 36.5% (115) men from public institutions and 22.3% (72) from private institutions, aged between 18 to 38 years (M = 24.7; SD = 6.3), of different grades. The Social Problem Solving Inventory, the Social Skills Inventory, the Self-Monitring Scale, the Higher Education Students' Academic Self-Efficacy Scale, the Coping Strategies Inventory and the Academic Experiences-Reduced Questionnaire were used. Self-efficacy in Academic Management (40.9%) and Self-affirmation in the Expression of Positive Affection (13.7%) had a greater impact on students from public and private institutions, which may contribute to possible interventions in the process of adapting to Higher Education. Prospective research can investigate issues related to sociodemographic data.(AU)

El objetivo del estudio fue investigar el impacto de las variables Habilidades sociales, Resolución de problemas sociales, Autocontrol, Autoeficacia y Afrontamiento en la adaptación académica en estudiantes de instituciones de educación superior públicas y privadas. Participaron 637 estudiantes de ambos sexos, siendo 36,5% (115) hombres de instituciones públicas y 22,3% (72) de instituciones privadas, con edades entre 18 y 38 años (M = 24,7; SD = 6,3), de diferentes grados. Se utilizaron el Inventario de Resolución de Problemas Sociales, el Inventario de Habilidades Sociales, la Escala de Autocontrol, la Escala de Autoeficacia Académica de los Estudiantes de Educación Superior, el Inventario de Estrategias de Afrontamiento y el Cuestionario de Experiencias Académicas Reducidas. La Autoeficacia en la Gestión Académica (40,9%) y la Autoafirmación en la Expresión de Afecto Positivo (13,7%) tuvieron un mayor impacto en los estudiantes de instituciones públicas y privadas, lo que puede contribuir a posibles intervenciones en el proceso de adaptación a la Educación Superior. La investigación prospectiva puede investigar cuestiones relacionadas con los datos sociodemográficos.(AU)

College competitiveness and medical school exam performance.

BACKGROUND: In medical school, students are tested through periodic USMLE Step 1 and 2 examinations before obtaining a medical license. Traditional predictors of medical school performance include MCAT scores, undergraduate grades, and undergraduate institutional selectivity. Prior studies indicate that admissions committees might unfairly discriminate against applicants who graduated from less competitive universities. However, there is limited literature to determine whether those who attended competitive colleges perform better on USMLE Step 1 and 2 examinations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study is to determine if students who attended competitive undergraduate colleges outperform those who did not on medical school benchmarks. METHODS: We defined a Competitive College as having greater than 10% of its student body scoring 1400 or higher (on a 1600 scale) on the SAT. If this criteria was not met, colleges would be categorized as Non-Competitive. Descriptive statistics and unpaired t-tests were calculated to analyze average test scores on the MCAT, Phase 1 NBME, USMLE Step 1, Phase 2 NBME, and USMLE Step 2. RESULTS: Our findings suggest there are no statistically significant differences between students who do or do not attend competitive undergraduate colleges on these medical school benchmark examinations following the MCAT. CONCLUSION: Admissions committees should use this data to aid in their student selection as our research indicates that institutional selectivity accurately predicts MCAT scores, but not performance on standardized medical school examinations once admitted.

Relationships between preadmission variables and academic outcomes for postbaccalaureate students in medical school.

There is currently little guidance for medical school admissions committees regarding how to weigh postbaccalaureate program grades relative to undergraduate grades. This study was designed to address this issue. Admissions data, preclerkship course performance and United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 results were analyzed over three years for University of California, San Diego (UCSD) postbaccalaureate premedical (PBPM) students (n = 25), students who participated in other postbaccalaureate programs (n = 34), and for the remainder of the medical students who did not participate in any postbaccalaureate programs (n = 329). UCSD PBPM program alumni did not significantly differ in their cumulative academic performance on exams in preclerkship courses and USMLE Step 1 pass rates compared to the rest of the class despite their significantly lower GPA, lower Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Math (BCPM) GPA, and Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) percentiles. For students who participated in the PBPM programs, PBPM program GPA was a significant predictor of preclerkship academic performance and USMLE Step 1 performance. When assessing academic readiness of applicants who have completed postbaccalaureate programs, admissions committees might closely consider the postbaccalaureate program GPA in addition to other academic metrices such as BCPM GPA and MCAT score.

The Validity of MCAT Scores in Predicting Students' Performance and Progress in Medical School: Results From a Multisite Study.

PURPOSE: This is the first multisite investigation of the validity of scores from the current version of the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) in clerkship and licensure contexts. It examined the predictive validity of MCAT scores and undergraduate grade point averages (UGPAs) for performance in preclerkship and clerkship courses and on the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge examinations. It also studied students' progress in medical school. METHOD: Researchers examined data from 17 U.S. and Canadian MD-granting medical schools for 2016 and 2017 entrants who volunteered for the research and applied with scores from the current MCAT exam. They also examined data for all U.S. medical schools for 2016 and 2017 entrants to regular-MD programs who applied with scores from the current exam. Researchers conducted linear and logistic regression analyses to determine whether MCAT total scores added value beyond UGPAs in predicting medical students' performance and progress. Importantly, they examined the comparability of prediction by sex, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Researchers reported medium to large correlations between MCAT total scores and medical student outcomes. Correlations between total UGPAs and medical student outcomes were similar but slightly lower. When MCAT scores and UGPAs were used together, they predicted student performance and progress better than either alone. Despite differences in average MCAT scores and UGPAs between students who self-identified as White or Asian and those from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, predictive validity results were comparable. The same was true for students from different socioeconomic backgrounds, and for males and females. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that MCAT scores add value to the prediction of medical student performance and progress and that applicants from different backgrounds who enter medical school with similar ranges of MCAT scores and UGPAs perform similarly in the curriculum.

Growth in basic science knowledge in first-year medical school and USMLE Step 1 results: a longitudinal investigation at one school.

PURPOSE: Our US medical school uses National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) tests as progress tests during the pre-clerkship curriculum to assess students. In this study, we examined students' growth patterns using progress tests in the first year of medical school to identify students at risk for failing United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. METHOD: Growth Mixture Modeling (GMM) was used to examine the growth trajectories based on NBME progress test scores in the first year of medical school. Achieving a passing score on the USMLE Step 1 at the end of the second year of medical school was used as the distal outcome, controlling for Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status. RESULTS: A total of 518 students from a US medical school were included in the analysis. Five different growth patterns were identified based on students' NBME test results. Seventy-eight students identified in Group 1 had the lowest starting NBME test score (mean = 33.6, 95% CI 32.0-35.2) and lowest growth rate (mean = 2.30, 95% CI 2.06-2.53). All 26 students who failed Step 1 at the end of the second year were in Group 1 (failing rate = 33%). Meanwhile Group 4 (n = 65 students) had moderate starting NBME test scores (mean = 37.9, 95% CI 36.3-39.0) but the highest growth rate with mean slope at 6.07 (95% CI 5.40-6.73). This group of students achieved significant higher USMLE Step1 scores comparing with the 3 other groups of students (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found students had heterogeneous growth patterns in progress test results in their first year of medical school. Growth patterns were highly predictive of USMLE step 1 results. This study can provide performance benchmarks for our future students to assess their progress and for medical educators to identify students who need support and guidance.

Can achievement at medical admission tests predict future performance in postgraduate clinical assessments? A UK-based national cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether scores on two undergraduate admissions tests (BioMedical Admissions Test (BMAT) and University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT)) predict performance on the postgraduate Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (MRCP) examination, including the clinical examination Practical Assessment of Clinical Examination Skills (PACES). DESIGN: National cohort study. SETTING: Doctors who graduated medical school between 2006 and 2018. PARTICIPANTS: 3045 doctors who had sat BMAT, UCAT and the MRCP. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Passing each section of the MRCP at the first attempt, including the clinical assessment PACES. RESULTS: Several BMAT and UCAT subtest scores displayed incremental predictive validity for performance on the first two (written) parts of the MRCP. Only aptitude and skills on BMAT (OR 1.34, 1.08 to 1.67, p=0.01) and verbal reasoning on UCAT (OR 1.34, 1.04 to 1.71, p=0.02) incrementally predicted passing PACES at the first attempt. CONCLUSIONS: Our results imply that the abilities assessed by aptitude and skills and verbal reasoning may be the most important cognitive attributes, of those routinely assessed at selection, for predicting future clinical performance. Selectors may wish to consider placing particular weight on scales assessing these attributes if they wish to select applicants likely to become more competent clinicians. These results are potentially relevant in an international context too, since many admission tests used globally, such as the Medical College Admission Test, assess similar abilities.

Wy'east: An Innovative, Culturally Responsive Postbaccalaureate Pathway for American Indians and Alaska Natives.

PROBLEM: American Indians and Alaska Natives (AIANs) face significant health disparities that are exacerbated by limited access to high-quality, culturally congruent health care providers. There are no premedical postbaccalaureate programs focused on AIAN students. APPROACH: The Northwest Native American Center of Excellence designed the Wy'east Pathway in 2018 to increase the number of AIANs matriculating to U.S. medical schools by supporting those on the cusp of matriculation. Wy'east scholars undertake 10 months of structured programming to augment their academic preparation, improve their Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores, and enhance their confidence and cultural identity. Cultural events and mentorship opportunities with AIAN faculty, staff, and cultural liaisons are threaded throughout the pathway curriculum to foster cultural resilience, mentorship, and community. Scholars earn conditional acceptance to Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) School of Medicine if they complete Wy'east and meet the following criteria: pass all examinations in the primary curricular threads, obtain a qualifying MCAT score, and meet professionalism standards. OUTCOMES: All 14 scholars who successfully completed Wy'east and met criteria in the first 2 cohorts (academic years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020) earned conditional acceptance to OHSU School of Medicine. Ten of the 14 scholars (71.4%) matriculated to OHSU School of Medicine, 2 (14.3%) matriculated to other medical schools, and 2 (14.3%) chose to pursue other health care fields. Wy'east scholars rated the foundational science of medicine and population health and epidemiology threads higher in terms of making them feel better prepared for medical school (mean = 4.71 and 4.83, respectively) than the academic skills and wellness thread (mean = 3.43). NEXT STEPS: Over the next 5 years, Wy'east will grow incrementally to offer a total of 18 conditional acceptance spots per cohort across 3 medical schools. Longitudinal tracking of Wy'east scholars' medical training and career outcomes will be conducted.

Inducting undergraduate medical students via WhatsApp-based multiple mini interviews during COVID-19 pandemic.

Selection of medical students requires both cognitive and soft skills assessment. Shalamar Medical and Dental College (SMDC) has been using on-campus multiple mini interviews to assess the latter but due to Covid-19 pandemic it became imperative that an alternative be found. The aim of this communication is to share the process SMDC went through to plan, design, and ultimately conduct WhatsApp-based multiple mini interviews (wMMI) in a low risk method as an entry criteria for undergraduate medical students. The process involved designing scenarios appropriate for online interviews, training the faculty members regarding conducting MMI as well as the use of technology, and designing an online webpage for enrolling, scheduling and assessing candidates. We were able to successfully complete wMMI process for 522 candidates within one week in a low risk setting using WhatsApp as communication medium with strong IT and administrative support.

First-generation and continuing-generation college graduates' application, acceptance, and matriculation to U.S. medical schools: a national cohort study.

Many U.S. medical schools conduct holistic review of applicants to enhance the socioeconomic and experiential diversity of the physician workforce. The authors examined the role of first-generation college-graduate status on U.S. medical school application, acceptance, and matriculation, hypothesizing that first-generation (vs. continuing-generation) college graduates would be less likely to apply and gain acceptance to medical school.Secondary analysis of de-identified data from a retrospective national-cohort study was conducted for individuals who completed the 2001-2006 Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Pre-Medical College Admission Test Questionnaire (PMQ) and the Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT). AAMC provided medical school application, acceptance, and matriculation data through 06/09/2013. Multivariable logistic regression models identified demographic, academic, and experiential variables independently associated with each outcome and differences between first-generation and continuing-generation students. Of 262,813 PMQ respondents, 211,216 (80.4%) MCAT examinees had complete data for analysis and 24.8% self-identified as first-generation college graduates. Of these, 142,847 (67.6%) applied to U.S. MD-degree-granting medical schools, of whom 86,486 (60.5%) were accepted, including 14,708 (17.0%) first-generation graduates; 84,844 (98.1%) acceptees matriculated. Adjusting for all variables, first-generation (vs. continuing-generation) college graduates were less likely to apply (odds ratio [aOR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.86) and be accepted (aOR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) to medical school; accepted first-generation college graduates were as likely as their continuing-generation peers to matriculate. Students with (vs. without) paid work experience outside hospitals/labs/clinics were less likely to apply, be accepted, and matriculate into medical school. Increased efforts to mitigate structural socioeconomic vulnerabilities that may prevent first-generation college students from applying to medical school are needed. Expanded use of holistic review admissions practices may help decision makers value the strengths first-generation college graduates and other underrepresented applicants bring to medical educationand the physician workforce.