A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Perceptions and Cost-Analysis of a Multiple Mini-Interview in a Pharmacy School Admissions Process. | LitMetric

Perceptions and Cost-Analysis of a Multiple Mini-Interview in a Pharmacy School Admissions Process.

Am J Pharm Educ

Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco,; Department of Pharmacy Practice, Purdue University College of Pharmacy, West Lafayette, Indiana.

Published: November 2015

Objective: To improve the quality of admissions interviews for a doctor of pharmacy program, using a multiple mini-interview (MMI) in place of the standard interview.

Methods: Stakeholders completed an anonymous web-based survey. This study characterized perceptions of the MMI format across 3 major stakeholders (candidates, interviewers, admissions committee members) and included comparative cost estimates.Costs were estimated using human and facility resources from the 2012 cycle (standard format) and the 2013 cycle (MMI format).

Results: Most candidates (65%), interviewers (86%), and admissions committee members (79%) perceived the MMI format as effective for evaluating applicants, and most (59% of candidates, 84% of interviewers, 77% of committee members) agreed that the MMI format should be continued. Cost per candidate interviewed was $136.34 (standard interview) vs $75.30 (MMI).

Conclusion: Perceptions of the MMI process were favorable across stakeholder groups, and this format was less costly per candidate interviewed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4727366PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.5688/ajpe799135DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

mmi format
12
committee members
12
multiple mini-interview
8
perceptions mmi
8
admissions committee
8
candidate interviewed
8
mmi
6
format
5
perceptions cost-analysis
4
cost-analysis multiple
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!