| Literature DB >> 16826862 |
P E M Smith1, F D Dunstan, C M Wiles.
Abstract
Appointments to the specialist registrar (SpR) grade depend almost entirely on performance at interview, yet standard panel interviews do not directly assess the competences required of a medical trainee. In this study, station interviews were used to select neurology SpRs. Eighteen candidates were assessed in three interviews, each involving three stations: a curriculum vitae (CV)-based interview, an interview with a simulated patient, and a discussion of scenarios based upon teaching, audit and research. Two or three assessors at each station ranked candidates independently before discussing the pooled rankings and reading written references. The CV-based interview rankings (resembling a traditional panel interview) correlated less well with the overall rankings (r=0.54) than did research (r=0.83), information giving (r=0.75), audit (r=0.70) or teaching presentation (r=0.59). Station interviews appear fairer (providing more time, more independent examiners, fresh starts at each station), although they require more planning and expense. Competency-based assessments should be more widely used in selecting medical trainees.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16826862 PMCID: PMC4953670 DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.6-3-279
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Med (Lond) ISSN: 1470-2118 Impact factor: 2.659