Multiple Mini Interview as an admission tool in higher education: Insights from a systematic review

Multiple Mini Interviews (MMI) have been conducted across the globe in the student selection process, particularly in health profession education. This paper reported the validity evidence of MMI in various educational settings.

A literature search was carried out through Scopus, Science Direct, Google Scholar, PubMed, and EBSCOhost databases based on specific search terms. Each article was appraised based on title, abstract, and full text. The selected articles were critically appraised, and relevant information to support the validity of MMI in various educational settings was synthesized. This paper followed the PRISMA guideline to ensure consistency in reporting systematic review results.

A majority of the studies were from Canada, with 41.54%, followed by the United Kingdom (25.39%), the United States (13.85%), and Australia (9.23%). The rest (9.24%) were from Germany, Ireland, the United Arab Emirates, Japan, Pakistan, Taiwan, and Malaysia. Moreover, most MMI stations ranged from seven to 12 with a duration of 10 min per station (including a 2-min gap between stations).

The results suggest that the content, response process, and internal structure of MMI were well supported by evidence; however, the relation and consequences of MMI to important outcome variables were inconsistently supported. The evidence shows that MMI is a non-biased, practical, feasible, reliable, and content-valid admission tool. However, further research on its impact on non-cognitive outcomes is required.