Validating a multiple mini-interview question bank assessing entry-level reasoning skills in candidates for graduate-entry medicine and dentistry programmes

Medical Education

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 350-359

  Roberts, Chris ^a,b   Zoanetti, Nathan ^c   Rothnie, Imogene ^a  

^a University of Sydney   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATABASES, FACTUAL; DECISION MAKING; EDUCATION, DENTAL; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, UNDERGRADUATE; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; NEW SOUTH WALES; SCHOOL ADMISSION CRITERIA; SCHOOLS, MEDICAL; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 62749165281     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03292.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Norman GR. Editorial: the morality of medical school admissions. Adv Health Sci Educ 2004 9 : 79 82.
2. Kreiter CD, Yin P, Solow C, Brennan RL. Investigating the reliability of the medical school admissions interview. Adv Health Sci Educ 2004 9 : 147 59.
3. Roberts C, Walton M, Rothnie I, Crossley J, Kumar K, Lyon P, Tiller D. Factors affecting the utility of the multi-mini-interview in selecting candidates for graduate-entry medical school. Med Educ 2008 4 : 396 404.
4. Eva K, Rosenfeld J, Reiter HI, Norman GR. An admissions OSCE: the multiple-mini-interview. Med Educ 2004 38 : 314 26.
5. Harris S, Owen C. Discerning quality: using the multiple mini-interview in student selection for the Australian National University Medical School. Med Educ 2007 41 : 234 41.
6. Brownell K, Collin T, Lemay JF. Introduction of the multiple mini-interview into the admissions process at the University of Calgary: acceptability and feasibility. Med Teach 2007 29 : 395 6.
7. Eva KW, Reiter H, Rosenfeld J, Norman GR. The ability of the multiple mini-interview to predict preclerkship performance in medical school. Acad Med 2004 79 40 2.
8. Reiter HI, Eva KW, Rosenfeld J, Norman GR. Multiple mini-interviews predict clerkship and licensing examination performance. Med Educ 2007 41 : 378 84.
9. Kumar K, Roberts C, Rothnie I, du Fresne C, Walton M. Experiences of the multiple mini-interview: a qualitative analysis. Med Educ 2009 43 : 360 7.
10. Australian Council for Educational Research. Graduate Australian Medical School Admission Guide 2006. Melbourne, Vic : ACER 2006.
11. Linacre JM. Many-Facet Rasch Measurement. Chicago, IL : MESA Press 1994 1 15.
12. Downing S. Threats to the validity of clinical teaching assessments: what about rater error? Med Educ 2005 39 : 353 5.
13. McManus I, Thompson M, Mollon J. Assessment of examiner leniency and stringency ('hawk-dove effect') in the MRCP (UK) clinical examination (PACES) using multi-facet Rasch modelling. BMC Med Educ 2006 6 : 1272 94.
14. Harasym P, Woloschuk W, Cunning L. Undesired variance due to examiner stringency/leniency effect in communication skill scores assessed in OSCEs. Adv Health Sci Educ 2008 13 : 617 32.
15. Griffin P, Zoanetti N. Moderation of Interviewer Judgement in Tests of Spoken English. 40th Annual TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) Convention and Exhibit, Tampa, FL, 15-18 March 2006 1 15.
16. Iramaneerat C, Myford C. Rater Effects in Clinical Performance Ratings of Surgery Residents. Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association Conference, San Francisco, CA, 8-12 April 2006.
17. Lord FM. Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1980.
18. Vale CD. Computerized item banking. In : Downing SM, Haladanya TM, eds. Handbook of Test Development. New York, NY : Routledge 2006 261 85.
19. Teresi JA. Overview of quantitative measurement methods. Equivalence, invariance, and differential item functioning in health applications. Med Care 2006 44 39 49.
20. Wright BD, Douglas GA. Best Test Design and Self-tailored Testing. Research Memorandum No. 19, Statistical Laboratory. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago, Department of Education 1975.
21. Holland PW, Thayer DT. Differential Item Performance and the Mantel-Haenszel Procedure (Technical Report No. 86-69). Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service 1986.
22. Klineberg I, Massey W, Thomas M, Cockrell D. A new era of dental education at the University of Sydney, Australia. Aust Dent J 2002 47 : 194 201.
23. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the RASCH Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2001 239 249.
24. Kelderman H, Macready GB. The use of loglinear models for assessing differential item functioning across manifest and latent examinee groups. J Educ Meas 1990 27 : 307 27.
25. Australian Council for Educational Research. ConQuest Version 2: Generalised Item Response Modelling Software. Camberwell, Vic : ACER 2007.
26. Masters GN. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 1982 47 : 149 74.
27. Camilli G, Shepard LA. Methods for Identifying Biased Test Items. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications 1994 7 21.
28. Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2000 249 72.
29. Draba RE. The identification and interpretation of item bias. MESA Memorandum No. 25. Chicago, IL : MESA Press 1977. Available at: http://www.rasch.org/memo25.htm.
30. Langer MM, Hill CD, Thissen D, Burwinkle TM, Varni JW, DeWalt DA. Item response theory detected differential item functioning between healthy and ill children in quality-of-life measures. J Clin Epidemiol 2008 61 : 268 76.
31. Mehrens WA. Validating licensing and certification test score interpretations and decisions: a response. Appl Meas Educ 1997 10 : 97 104.
32. Tennant A, Pallant JF. Unidimensionality matters (A tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Meas Trans 2006 20 (1 1048 51.