| Abstract/Notes |
INTRODUCTION: There is very little evidence that the admission interview is able to predict success in a chiropractic program and personal statements are also somewhat meaningless, especially if applicants can mail them in. Only undergraduate grade point average (UGPA) and the MCAT have been shown to be predictors of success in medical school. Regardless, members of interview committees stoutly defend the process on the basis that they are measuring something else, e.g., “the fire in a candidate’s belly”. Evidence does exist, however, that personality traits such as conscientiousness may predict performance in medical school. The purpose of this study was to determine if variables from the admissions process at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) and/or CMCC examinations predict the performance of students on the licensure examinations from the Canadian Chiropractic Examining Board (CCEB). METHODS: After ethics approval from both CMCC and CCEB, data from one cohort of students were used, including pre-registration information and all results from CMCC as well as CCEB exams. An independent researcher combined the data by student name and then anonymized the data and destroyed the linking information. Variables from CMCC included in the analysis were admission interviews, UGPA, chiropractic college grade-point-average (CGPA) for four years, 3rd year OSCE theory, 3rd year OSCE practical, 4th year mid-term and final-exams. The CCEB supplied outcome measures of Basic Science, Applied Science, Clinical Decision Making, and Clinical Skills Examinations. Gender, ethnicity, and UGPA (converted to a University of Calgary 4-point scale) were also considered. For each outcome variable, a backward stepwise multiple linear regression was performed. RESULTS: After nine iterations, 40% of the variance in the Basic Science examination (R2=0.405) was explained by the independent variables (predictors) of 3rd year OSCE practical and 2nd year CGPA (in order of importance). After seven iterations, 45% of the variance in the Applied Science examination (R2=0.448) was explained by the 4th year final exam, and CGPA for years 4, 2, and 3. After nine iterations, 24% of the variance in the Clinical Decision Making examination (R2=0.239) was explained by CGPA of years 4, 1, 2, and 3. After nine iterations, 16% of the variance in the Clinical Skills Examinations (R2=0.160) was explained by the 3rd year OSCE Theory and CGPA for year 2. DISCUSSION: This study is limited by its small sample size. Data over a number of years should be combined for a more effective study. In addition, multiple regression does not take into effect the timeline, and with a larger study a latent variable path analysis might be more meaningful and reveal the impact of UGPA and year 2 CGPA on the other variables. The admission interview was not a predictor of success on any of the outcome variables. The CGPA from year 2 was a predictor for all outcome variables. This infers that the knowledge and skills gained in years one and two are critical in the educational process of chiropractic students and that later success hinges on a student’s ability to perform well in the first two years. CONCLUSION: The admissions interview is not a predictor of success on the outcome measures of the CCEB. Student CGPA in year two is critical to success on CCEB licensure examinations. This information infers that students should only continue in their education after they have demonstrated a mastery level at the end of year two. This is the first group project where data from CMCC were combined with CCEB outcome measures. It appears that the cooperation was successful and should continue. This abstract is reproduced with the permission of the publisher. |
