The association between how medical students were selected and their perceived stress levels in Year-1 of medical school.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of medical students' mental distress is high. While schools apply various methods to select a well-performing and diverse student population, little is known about the association between different selection methods and the well-being of these students during medical school. The present retrospective multi-cohort study assessed whether students selected by high grades, assessment, or weighted lottery showed different stress perception levels in Year-1 of medical school. METHODS: Of 1144 Dutch Year-1 medical students, 650 (57%) of the cohorts 2013, 2014, and 2018 who were selected by high grades, assessment, or weighted lottery completed a stress perception questionnaire (PSS-14). A multilevel regression analysis assessed the association between selection method (independent variable) and stress perception levels (dependent variable) while controlling for gender and cohort. In a post-hoc analysis, academic performance (optimal vs. non-optimal) was included in the multilevel model. RESULTS: Students selected by assessment (B = 2.25, p < .01, effect size (ES) = small) or weighted lottery (B = 3.95, p < .01, ES = medium) had higher stress perception levels than students selected by high grades. Extending the regression model with optimal academic performance (B=-4.38, p < .001, ES = medium), eliminated the statistically significant difference in stress perception between assessment and high grades and reduced the difference between weighted lottery and high grades from 3.95 to 2.45 (B = 2.45, p < .05, ES = small). CONCLUSIONS: Selection methods intended to create a diverse student population - assessment and lottery - are associated with higher stress perception levels in Year-1 of medical school. These findings offer medical schools insights into fulfilling their responsibility to take care of their students' well-being.

Applicant perceptions of selection methods for health professions education: Rationales and subgroup differences.

CONTEXT: Applicant perceptions of selection methods can affect motivation, performance and withdrawal and may therefore be of relevance in the context of widening access. However, it is unknown how applicant subgroups perceive different selection methods. OBJECTIVES: Using organisational justice theory, the present multi-site study examined applicant perceptions of various selection methods, rationales behind perceptions and subgroup differences. METHODS: Applicants to five Dutch undergraduate health professions programmes (N = 704) completed an online survey including demographics and a questionnaire on applicant perceptions applied to 11 commonly used selection methods. Applicants rated general favourability and justice dimensions (7-point Likert scale) and could add comments for each method. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics revealed a preference for selection methods on which applicants feel more 'in control': General favourability ratings were highest for curriculum-sampling tests (mean [M] = 5.32) and skills tests (M = 5.13), while weighted lottery (M = 3.05) and unweighted lottery (M = 2.97) were perceived least favourable. Additionally, applicants preferred to distinguish themselves on methods that assess attributes beyond cognitive abilities. Qualitative content analysis of comments revealed several conflicting preferences, including a desire for multiple selection methods versus concerns of experiencing too much stress. Results from a linear mixed model of general favourability indicated some small subgroup differences in perceptions (based on gender, migration background, prior education and parental education), but practical meaning of these differences was negligible. Nevertheless, concerns were expressed that certain selection methods can hinder equitable admission due to inequal access to resources. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings illustrate that applicants desire to demonstrate a variety of attributes on a combination of selection tools, but also observe that this can result in multiple drawbacks. The present study can help programmes in deciding which selection methods to include, which more negatively perceived methods should be better justified to applicants, and how to adapt methods to meet applicants' needs.

Influence of social networks in healthcare on preparation for selection procedures of health professions education: a Dutch interview study.

OBJECTIVES: Health professions education (HPE) students are often not representative of the populations they will serve. The underrepresentation of non-traditional students is problematic because diversity is essential for promoting excellence in health education and care. This study aimed to understand the perceptions of traditional and non-traditional students regarding facilitators and barriers in preparing for HPE selection procedures, and to determine the role of social networks in their decision-making and preparations to apply. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted with 26 Dutch youth who were interested in university-level HPE programmes. Semistructured interviews and sociograms were analysed using thematic analysis, adopting a constructivist approach. RESULTS: Twenty-six high school students participated, with traditional and non-traditional backgrounds, with and without social networks in healthcare and higher education. Two themes were constructed. First, four high-impact facilitators helped to overcome barriers to apply and in preparation for selection: access to a social network connection working or studying in healthcare, to correct information, to healthcare experience and to a social network connection in higher education. Lack of information was the main barrier while access to social network connections in healthcare was the main facilitator to overcome this barrier. However, this access was unevenly distributed. Second, access alone is not enough: the need for agency to make use of available facilitators is also essential. CONCLUSIONS: The themes are discussed using intersectionality. Traditional students with access to facilitators develop their self-efficacy and agency within social structures that privilege them, whereas non-traditional students must develop those skills without such structures. Our findings provide recommendations for the ways in which universities can remove barriers that cause unequal opportunities to prepare for the selection of HPE programmes. Along with equitable admissions, these recommendations can help to achieve a more representative student population and subsequently a better quality of health education and care.