Experiences of the multiple mini-interview: a qualitative analysis
Experiences of the multiple mini-interview: a qualitative analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03291.x
复制
发表时间：
2009-04-01
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Walton, Merrilyn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kumar, Koshila;Roberts, Chris;Walton, Merrilyn
多次迷你面试（MMIs）越来越多地用于高风险的医学院选择。然而，关于参与者的经历和对这一过程的理解的研究却很少发表。我们报告了一项关于MMI进入研究生入学医学院的候选人和面试官经历的国际定性研究的结果。采用框架分析法对6个访谈对象小组、442名候选人和75名访谈者的定性数据进行了分析。多名研究人员（n = 3）分析了一部分数据，并开发了一个主题框架，捕捉数据中出现的与内容相关（即所说的内容）的主题。然后使用这个主题框架对完整的数据集进行编码。确定了几个关键主题，包括参与者对进行：(i)一对一访谈的看法；（ii）多重评估机会；（iii）标准化的、基于场景的面试；（iv）小型访谈，以及(v) MMI目前测量的属性，以及（vi）应该评估的其他属性。我们更深入地了解了参与者在选择研究生进入医学院的高风险决策过程中的经历。我们根据现有文献讨论了我们的研究结果，并提出建议，以解决参与者对MMI的不同期望和理解问题，并提高该过程的可信度和可接受性。
Multiple mini-interviews (MMIs) are increasingly used in high-stakes medical school selection. Yet there is little published research about participants' experiences and understandings of the process. We report the findings from an international qualitative study on candidate and interviewer experiences of the MMI for entry into a graduate-entry medical school.Qualitative data from six interviewer focus groups and 442 candidate and 75 interviewer surveys were analysed using framework analysis. Multiple researchers (n = 3) analysed a proportion of the data and developed a thematic framework capturing content-related (i.e. what was said) themes that emerged from the data. This thematic framework was then used to code the complete dataset.Several key themes were identified, including participants' perspectives on having: (i) a one-to-one interview; (ii) multiple assessment opportunities; (iii) a standardised, scenario-based interview; (iv) a mini-interview, and on (v) the attributes currently measured by the MMI, and (vi) other attributes that should be assessed.We gained a deeper understanding of participants' experiences of a high-stakes, decision-making process for selection into a graduate-entry medical school. We discuss our findings in the light of the existing literature and make recommendations to address the issue of differing participant expectations and understandings of the MMI, and to improve the credibility and acceptability of the process.