Medical Education and Admissions
Open access
Peer reviewed
Scollr summary
What this paper is about
It is suggested that, unlike earlier UK research, school background and gender now show modest associations with MMI performance, and WP applicants, however, perform comparably to their peers, indicating progress towards equitable access.
Full abstract
Read the full abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiple Mini Interviews (MMIs) are widely used in medical school admissions to assess non-academic attributes. While MMIs are designed to promote fairness, questions remain about how applicant background may influence performance. In 2015, a single-institution UK study found no significant impact of school background or socioeconomic status on MMI scores. A decade later, this study re-examines those associations in a similar UK context. METHODS: In this cross-sectional observational study, we analysed data from 545 home applicants to Imperial College School of Medicine during the 2025 admissions cycle. Using multiple linear regression, we explored the relationship between total MMI score and applicant gender, school type, and widening participation (WP) status. Station-level regressions were also conducted. RESULTS: The regression model was significant and explained 7.6% of score variance. Out of a maximum score of 70, female applicants scored on average 3.2 points higher than males (95% CI: 2.1 to 4.2, p < 0.001). Applicants from independent and state-selective schools scored 2.4 (95% CI: 1.0 to 3.9, p = 0.001) and 1.3 points higher (95% CI: 0.0 to 2.7, p = 0.046), respectively, than state non-selective peers. WP status was not a significant predictor. Station-level analyses revealed no consistent disadvantage for WP applicants. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that, unlike earlier UK research, school background and gender now show modest associations with MMI performance. WP applicants, however, perform comparably to their peers, indicating progress towards equitable access. Future work should explore the potential impact of coaching and familiarity with interview formats to inform MMI design.
Direct answer
What can I do from this paper page?
Use this page to scan "Equity in medical school interviews: a cross-sectional analysis of school type, gender, and widening participation status" quickly: start with the summary and abstract, then check the authors, source, topics, and related papers. From here, open Scollr to follow Medical Education and Admissions research, save the paper, or map adjacent work.
Research areas
Follow related topics
Citation
BibTeX
@article{Moorjani2026Equity,
title = {Equity in medical school interviews: a cross-sectional analysis of school type, gender, and widening participation status},
author = {Umika Moorjani and Celia Brown and Lidia Bonomi and Amir H. Sam and Shahid A. Khan},
journal = {BMC Medical Education},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.1186/s12909-026-09790-8},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09790-8}
}FAQ
Using this paper in a discovery workflow
How do I find related work for this paper?
Use the related papers and topic links on this page as starting points. In Scollr, you can also open the paper and build a literature map around its references, citing papers, and related work.
How can I keep up with new Medical Education and Admissions research papers?
Follow Medical Education and Admissions research in Scollr. New papers from the topic flow into a personalized feed, and you can save useful studies to revisit later.
Can I cite this paper from this page?
This page includes a static BibTeX block for Equity in medical school interviews: a cross-sectional analysis of school type, gender, and widening participation status. Always verify the DOI, source, and publication details against the publisher record before submitting a manuscript.
Follow this research in Scollr
Follow the topics and authors behind this paper, save useful studies, and build a literature map when you are ready to go deeper.
Get the app