Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Medical Education and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Dimensionality and predictive validity of the HAM-Nat, a test of natural sciences for medical school admission

Johanna C Hissbach1, Dietrich Klusmann2 and Wolfgang Hampe1*

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Cell Biology, Center for Experimental Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany

2 Department of Medical Psychology, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Medical Education 2011, 11:83  doi:10.1186/1472-6920-11-83

Published: 14 October 2011

Abstract

Background

Knowledge in natural sciences generally predicts study performance in the first two years of the medical curriculum. In order to reduce delay and dropout in the preclinical years, Hamburg Medical School decided to develop a natural science test (HAM-Nat) for student selection. In the present study, two different approaches to scale construction are presented: a unidimensional scale and a scale composed of three subject specific dimensions. Their psychometric properties and relations to academic success are compared.

Methods

334 first year medical students of the 2006 cohort responded to 52 multiple choice items from biology, physics, and chemistry. For the construction of scales we generated two random subsamples, one for development and one for validation. In the development sample, unidimensional item sets were extracted from the item pool by means of weighted least squares (WLS) factor analysis, and subsequently fitted to the Rasch model. In the validation sample, the scales were subjected to confirmatory factor analysis and, again, Rasch modelling. The outcome measure was academic success after two years.

Results

Although the correlational structure within the item set is weak, a unidimensional scale could be fitted to the Rasch model. However, psychometric properties of this scale deteriorated in the validation sample. A model with three highly correlated subject specific factors performed better. All summary scales predicted academic success with an odds ratio of about 2.0. Prediction was independent of high school grades and there was a slight tendency for prediction to be better in females than in males.

Conclusions

A model separating biology, physics, and chemistry into different Rasch scales seems to be more suitable for item bank development than a unidimensional model, even when these scales are highly correlated and enter into a global score. When such a combination scale is used to select the upper quartile of applicants, the proportion of successful completion of the curriculum after two years is expected to rise substantially.