Ranking Spain's Medical Schools by their performance in the national residency examination

Abstract

Introduction The design of an appropriate method for the selection of medical graduates for residency posts is extremely important, not only for the efficiency of the method itself (accurate identification of most competent candidates), but also for its influence on the study and teaching methodologies operating in medical schools. Currently, there is a great variation in the criteria used in different countries and there is no definitively appropriate method. The use of isolated or combined criteria, such as the marks obtained by students in medical schools, their performance in tests of theoretical knowledge and evaluations of clinical competence, or personal interviews, have a limited value for identifying those candidates who will perform better during the residency and later on during independent practice. Objectives To analyse the variability in the methodologies used for the selection of residents employed in different countries, in particular those used in the United Kingdom and USA, where external agencies and medical schools make systematic analyses of curriculum development. The advantages and disadvantages of national or transnational licensing examinations on the process of convergence and harmonization of medical degrees and residency programmes through Europe are discussed. The present analysis is used to design a new and more efficient multi-criteria methodology for resident selection in Spain, which will be published in the next issue of this journal. Conclusions Since the multi-criteria methods used in UK and USA appear to be most consistent, these have been employed for designing the new methodology that could be applied in Spain. Although many experts in medical education reject national examinations for awarding medical degrees or ranking candidates for residency posts, it seems that, when appropriately designed, they can be used to verify the level of competence of graduating students without necessarily distorting curriculum implementation or improvement.