Is the Medical Profession Slowly Deteriorating?

[excelspreadsheet]

4 hours ago, vino said:

Agreed with this. Becoming a successful Canadian medical school applicant has evolved into a standard formula and I think attracts the wrong type of people sometimes. There should be a heavier screening process for admission imo. Maybe even going as far as personality testing, CASper for every school would be a good start.

I think I understand the sentiment behind your post... but really, that's not realistic. Do we have a personality test that selects for the "correct" personality in medicine? All schools have specific traits/competencies they select for through the interview and application process. How can we assume that a new test wouldn't be passable by the people you are trying to screen for/against?

 

On 9/24/2018 at 12:26 AM, Briannaxox said:

@bigboydyo I respect and understand what you're saying honestly. But in my opinion if they aren't In the top 170 people (like in you're example), they don't deserve it. If you're a great medical applicant but like 20% of applicants are better THAN YOU at the game of admissions then you don't deserve entry regardless of how great of a doctor you'd make. Like just a random analogy, let's say you're a great track and field star. You're excellent. But not in the top 1% that gets to go to the Olympics. Then that's it. There is no way to short cut your way into the Olympics. You stay in the provincials etc. but no Olympics for you. If every decent runner could make it to the Olympics then the Olympics would suck wouldnt they lol I don't know why people assume this is a troll. It is not. Allowing ways to bypass competition undermines the integrity and legitimacy of any system (medicine is just an example). 

First, no school *only* lets in their class size. Most have quite a bit of wait-list movement and it's closer to 50% of interviewees are admitted. Second that analogy doesn't work. To qualify for the Olympics, you're tested directly on the skill that you would need to perform. Med school admissions are indirect measures through GPA, interviews and references - schools can only predict who would make good physicians based on these. Should we turn away someone who had a rough start to their undergrad but excels in other areas like research? or someone who had to work through school and "lacks" extra-curricular activities? Those life experiences and the learning that comes with it or skills like research seem pretty significant to me...

[MedMaybe3563]

13 hours ago, excelspreadsheet said:

I think I understand the sentiment behind your post... but really, that's not realistic. Do we have a personality test that selects for the "correct" personality in medicine? All schools have specific traits/competencies they select for through the interview and application process. How can we assume that a new test wouldn't be passable by the people you are trying to screen for/against?

 

First, no school *only* lets in their class size. Most have quite a bit of wait-list movement and it's closer to 50% of interviewees are admitted. Second that analogy doesn't work. To qualify for the Olympics, you're tested directly on the skill that you would need to perform. Med school admissions are indirect measures through GPA, interviews and references - schools can only predict who would make good physicians based on these. Should we turn away someone who had a rough start to their undergrad but excels in other areas like research? or someone who had to work through school and "lacks" extra-curricular activities? Those life experiences and the learning that comes with it or skills like research seem pretty significant to me...

 

You're correct it would be a challenge and would require some very good clinical and personality psychologists well professed in psychometrics to design something like that.