• Fiona Patterson, Victoria Carr, Lara Zibarras, Bill Burr, Liz Berkin, Simon Plint, Bill Irish, and Simon Gregory.
• City University, London. f.patterson@city.ac.uk
• Clin Med. 2009 Oct 1; 9 (5): 417420417-20.

AbstractThis study examined whether two machine-marked tests (MMTs; a clinical problem-solving test and situational judgement test), previously validated for selection into U.K. general practice (GP) training, could provide a valid methodology for shortlisting into core medical training (CMT). A longitudinal design was used to examine the MMTs' psychometric properties in CMT samples, and correlations between MMT scores and CMT interview outcomes. Independent samples from two years were used: in 2008, a retrospective analysis was conducted (n=1711), while in 2009, CMT applicants completed the MMTs for evaluation purposes (n=2265). Both MMTs showed good reliability in CMT samples, similar to GP samples. Both MMTs were good predictors of CMT interview performance (r = 0.56, p < 0.001 in 2008; r = 0.61, p < 0.001 in 2009) and offered incremental validity over the current shortlisting process. The GP MMTs offer an appropriate measurement methodology for selection into CMT, representing a significant innovation for selection methodology.

16 keywords...

hide…