We have located links that may give you full text access.
Impact of the final adjective in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation on determination of applicant desirability.
Medical Education Online 2018 December
BACKGROUND: The Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) is a primary source of information used by residency programs in their selection of trainees. The MSPE contains a narrative description of the applicant's performance during medical school. In 2002, the Association of American Medical Colleges' guideline for preparation of the MSPE recommended inclusion of a comparative summative assessment of the student's overall performance relative to his/her peers (final adjective).
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesize that the inclusion of a final adjective in the MSPE affects a reviewer's assessment of the applicant's desirability more than the narrative description of performance and designed a study to evaluate this hypothesis.
DESIGN: Fifty-six faculty members from the Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine with experience reviewing MSPEs as part of the intern selection process reviewed two pairs of mock MSPE letters. In each pair, the narrative in one letter was superior to that in the other. Two final adjectives describing relative class ranks were created. Each subject was first presented with a pair of letters with mismatched final adjective (study), i.e., the letter with the stronger narrative was presented with the weaker final adjective and vice versa. The subject was then presented with a second pair of letters without final adjectives (control). Subjects ranked the relative desirability of the two applicants in each pair.
RESULTS: The proportion of rankings congruent with the strength of the narratives under study and control conditions were compared. Subjects were significantly less likely to rank the applicants congruent with the strength of the narratives when the strength of the final adjectives conflicted with the strength of the narrative; 42.9% of study letters were ranked congruent with the narrative versus 82.1% of controls (p = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The MSPE final adjective had a greater impact than the narrative description of performance on the determination of applicant desirability.
ABBREVIATIONS: MSPE: Medical Student Performance Evaluation; AAMC: Association of American Medical Colleges; BCM: Baylor College of Medicine.
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesize that the inclusion of a final adjective in the MSPE affects a reviewer's assessment of the applicant's desirability more than the narrative description of performance and designed a study to evaluate this hypothesis.
DESIGN: Fifty-six faculty members from the Departments of Pediatrics and Medicine with experience reviewing MSPEs as part of the intern selection process reviewed two pairs of mock MSPE letters. In each pair, the narrative in one letter was superior to that in the other. Two final adjectives describing relative class ranks were created. Each subject was first presented with a pair of letters with mismatched final adjective (study), i.e., the letter with the stronger narrative was presented with the weaker final adjective and vice versa. The subject was then presented with a second pair of letters without final adjectives (control). Subjects ranked the relative desirability of the two applicants in each pair.
RESULTS: The proportion of rankings congruent with the strength of the narratives under study and control conditions were compared. Subjects were significantly less likely to rank the applicants congruent with the strength of the narratives when the strength of the final adjectives conflicted with the strength of the narrative; 42.9% of study letters were ranked congruent with the narrative versus 82.1% of controls (p = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The MSPE final adjective had a greater impact than the narrative description of performance on the determination of applicant desirability.
ABBREVIATIONS: MSPE: Medical Student Performance Evaluation; AAMC: Association of American Medical Colleges; BCM: Baylor College of Medicine.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app