A holistic review of the medical school admission process: examining correlates of academic underperformance

Background: Despite medical school admission committees’ best efforts, a handful of seemingly capable students invariably struggle during their first year of study. Yet, even as entrance criteria continue to broaden beyond cognitive qualifications, attention inevitably reverts back to such factors when seeking to understand these phenomena. Using a host of applicant, admission, and post-admission variables, the purpose of this inductive study, then, was to identify a constellation of student characteristics that, taken collectively, would be predictive of students at-risk of underperforming during the first year of medical school. In it, we hypothesize that a wider range of factors than previously recognized could conceivably play roles in understanding why students experience academic problems early in the medical educational continuum. Methods: The study sample consisted of the five most recent matriculant cohorts from a large, southeastern medical school (n=537). Independent variables reflected: 1) the personal demographics of applicants (e.g., age, gender); 2) academic criteria (e.g., undergraduate grade point averages [GPA], medical college admission test); 3) selection processes (e.g., entrance track, interview scores, committee votes); and 4) other indicators of personality and professionalism (e.g., Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test™ emotional intelligence scores, NEO PI-R™ personality profiles, and appearances before the Professional Code Committee [PCC]). The dependent variable, first-year underperformance, was defined as ANY action (repeat, conditionally advance, or dismiss) by the college's Student Progress and Promotions Committee (SPPC) in response to predefined academic criteria. This study protocol was approved by the local medical institutional review board (IRB). Results: Of the 537 students comprising the study sample, 61 (11.4%) met the specified criterion for academic underperformance. Significantly increased academic risks were identified among students who 1) had lower mean undergraduate science GPAs (OR=0.24, p=0.001); 2) entered medical school via an accelerated BS/MD track (OR=16.15, p=0.002); 3) were 31 years of age or older (OR=14.76, p=0.005); and 4) were non-unanimous admission committee admits (OR=0.53, p=0.042). Two dimensions of the NEO PI-R™ personality inventory, openness (+) and conscientiousness (−), were modestly but significantly correlated with academic underperformance. Only for the latter, however, were mean scores found to differ significantly between academic performers and underperformers. Finally, appearing before the college's PCC (OR=4.21, p=0.056) fell just short of statistical significance. Conclusions: Our review of various correlates across the matriculation process highlights the heterogeneity of factors underlying students’ underperformance during the first year of medical school and challenges medical educators to understand the complexity of predicting who, among admitted matriculants, may be at future academic risk

A qualitative study of enablers and barriers influencing the incorporation of social accountability values into organisational culture: a perspective from two medical schools

Background: Definitions of social accountability describe the obligation of medical schools to direct education, research and service activities towards addressing the priority health concerns of the population they serve. While such statements give some direction as to how the goal might be reached, it does not identify what factors might facilitate or hinder its achievement. This study set out to identify and explore enablers and barriers influencing the incorporation of social accountability values into medical schools. Methods: Semi structured interviews of fourteen senior staff in Bar Ilan and Leeds medical schools were undertaken following a literature review. Participants were recruited by purposive sampling in order to identify factors perceived to play a part in the workings of each institution. Results: Academic prestige was seen as a key barrier that was dependent on research priorities and student selection. The role of champions was considered to be vital to tackle staff perceptions and facilitate progress. Including practical community experience for students was felt to be a relevant way in which the curriculum could be designed through engagement with local partners. Conclusions: Successful adoption of social accountability values requires addressing concerns around potential negative impacts on academic prestige and standards. Identifying and supporting credible social accountability champions to disseminate the values throughout research and education departments in medical and other faculties is also necessary, including mapping onto existing work streams and research agendas. Demonstrating the contribution the institution can make to local health improvement and regional development by a consideration of its economic footprint may also be valuable

Choosing a medical specialty: the difference between what students want and what society needs

The choice of a specialty by medical students is a complex one that has significant implications for the future supply of physician manpower. The study by Weissman et al. portrays this choice as reflecting the degree of congruence between a student’s needs and values and his or her perception of the characteristics of the various specialties. The existing shortages in the supply of various specialists in Israel may be interpreted as signifying a lack of alignment of student needs and perceptions. This commentary will extend the implications of this work to include the connection between students’ choices and the physician manpower needs of society, and will focus on primary care physician shortages in the United States as but one example of the implications of these relationships