PURPOSE: To evaluate a new method, used for the first time in Italy, of administering the Medical Licensing Examination (MLE). METHOD: Eighty medical school graduates taking the MLE were studied. The MLE was based on the Multimedia Integrated Pilot Project (MIPP), a single two-step examination that combines computer-based case simulations (step 1) and clinical encounters using standardized patients (step 2). Step 1 assessed mainly clinical knowledge and decision-making skills. Step 2 measured the ability to obtain a focused history, perform a relevant physical examination, prioritize a differential diagnosis and management plan, and provide patient education or counseling. The correlations between the total MIPP scores and the exam scores students obtained during the six-year medical school curriculum were evaluated. RESULTS: The step 1, step 2, and total MIPP scores were moderately correlated with the curriculum scores. A moderate correlation also existed between the scores reported in step 1 and those of step 2. CONCLUSIONS: The MIPP is a good tool for assessing clinical competence. Internationally, computer-based and standardized patient assessments are being used more often in licensing examinations. Continuous use of this method could improve medical graduates' performances.
PURPOSE: To evaluate a new method, used for the first time in Italy, of administering the Medical Licensing Examination (MLE). METHOD: Eighty medical school graduates taking the MLE were studied. The MLE was based on the Multimedia Integrated Pilot Project (MIPP), a single two-step examination that combines computer-based case simulations (step 1) and clinical encounters using standardized patients (step 2). Step 1 assessed mainly clinical knowledge and decision-making skills. Step 2 measured the ability to obtain a focused history, perform a relevant physical examination, prioritize a differential diagnosis and management plan, and provide patient education or counseling. The correlations between the total MIPP scores and the exam scores students obtained during the six-year medical school curriculum were evaluated. RESULTS: The step 1, step 2, and total MIPP scores were moderately correlated with the curriculum scores. A moderate correlation also existed between the scores reported in step 1 and those of step 2. CONCLUSIONS: The MIPP is a good tool for assessing clinical competence. Internationally, computer-based and standardized patient assessments are being used more often in licensing examinations. Continuous use of this method could improve medical graduates' performances.