Display options
Cite
Parry J, Mathers J, Stevens A, et al. Admissions processes for five year medical courses at English schools: review. BMJ. 2006;332(7548):1005-9doi: 10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55.
Parry, J., Mathers, J., Stevens, A., Parsons, A., Lilford, R., Spurgeon, P., & Thomas, H. (2006). Admissions processes for five year medical courses at English schools: review. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 332(7548), 1005-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55
Parry, Jayne, et al. "Admissions processes for five year medical courses at English schools: review." BMJ (Clinical research ed.) vol. 332,7548 (2006): 1005-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55
Parry J, Mathers J, Stevens A, Parsons A, Lilford R, Spurgeon P, Thomas H. Admissions processes for five year medical courses at English schools: review. BMJ. 2006 Apr 29;332(7548):1005-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55. Epub 2006 Mar 16. PMID: 16543300; PMCID: PMC1450044.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

BMJ. 2006 Apr 29;332(7548):1005-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55. Epub 2006 Mar 16.

Admissions processes for five year medical courses at English schools: review.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

Jayne Parry, Jonathan Mathers, Andrew Stevens, Amanda Parsons, Richard Lilford, Peter Spurgeon, Hywel Thomas

Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT. [email protected]

PMID: 16543300 PMCID: PMC1450044 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38768.590174.55

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the current methods used by English medical schools to identify prospective medical students for admission to the five year degree course.

DESIGN: Review study including documentary analysis and interviews with admissions tutors.

SETTING: All schools (n = 22) participating in the national expansion of medical schools programme in England.

RESULTS: Though there is some commonality across schools with regard to the criteria used to select future students (academic ability coupled with a "well rounded" personality demonstrated by motivation for medicine, extracurricular interests, and experience of team working and leadership skills) the processes used vary substantially. Some schools do not interview; some shortlist for interview only on predicted academic performance while those that shortlist on a wider range of non-academic criteria use various techniques and tools to do so. Some schools use information presented in the candidate's personal statement and referee's report while others ignore this because of concerns over bias. A few schools seek additional information from supplementary questionnaires filled in by the candidates. Once students are shortlisted, interviews vary in terms of length, panel composition, structure, content, and scoring methods.

CONCLUSION: The stated criteria for admission to medical school show commonality. Universities differ greatly, however, in how they apply these criteria and in the methods used to select students. Different approaches to admissions should be developed and tested.

References

  1. BMJ. 2003 Jul 19;327(7407):139-42 - PubMed
  2. BMJ. 2005 Sep 10;331(7516):555-9 - PubMed
  3. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2001;6(2):159-75 - PubMed
  4. BMJ. 2002 Apr 20;324(7343):952-7 - PubMed
  5. BMJ. 2003 Feb 22;326(7386):429-32 - PubMed
  6. Acad Med. 2003 Mar;78(3):313-21 - PubMed
  7. BMJ. 2005 Sep 10;331(7516):559-60 - PubMed
  8. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2004;9(2):147-59 - PubMed
  9. Med Educ. 2004 Sep;38(9):1002-5 - PubMed
  10. BMJ. 1995 Feb 25;310(6978):501-2 - PubMed
  11. BMJ. 1998 Oct 24;317(7166):1111-6; discussion 1116-7 - PubMed
  12. Med Educ. 2005 Mar;39(3):258-65 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types