ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) has been used increasingly for selection of students to health professions programmes. OBJECTIVES: This paper reports on the evidence base for the feasibility, acceptability, reliability and validity of the MMI. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL and MEDLINE STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies testing the MMI on applicants to health professions training. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Each paper was appraised by two reviewers. Narrative summary findings on feasibility, acceptability, reliability and validity are presented. RESULTS: Of the 64 citations identified, 30 were selected for review. The modal MMI consisted of 10 stations, each lasting eight minutes and assessed by one interviewer. The MMI was feasible, i.e. did not require more examiners, did not cost more, and interviews were completed over a short period of time. It was acceptable, i.e. fair, transparent, free from gender, cultural and socio-economic bias, and did not favour applicants with previous coaching. Its reliability was reported to be moderate to high, with Cronbach's alpha = 0.69-0.98 and G = 0.55-0.72. MMI scores did not correlate to traditional admission tools scores, were not associated with pre-entry academic qualifications, were the best predictor for OSCE performance and statistically predictive of subsequent performance at medical council examinations. CONCLUSIONS: The MMI is reliable, acceptable and feasible. The evidence base for its validity against future medical council exams is growing with reports from longitudinal investigations. However, further research is needed for its acceptability in different cultural context and validity against future clinical behaviours.
