Personality Preference Distribution of Dental Students Admitted to One Dental School Using Different Selection Methods

Dental students' Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality profile in the past 50 years: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dental students' personalities are strongly correlated with their didactic and clinical performances. With the significant changes in the social environment in the past decades, students' personalities may also change dramatically. Additionally, with the increasing number of international students admitted into US dental programs, educators must pay attention to the potential personality differences between domestic and international students.

BACKGROUND

A systematic review focusing on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality types of dental students was conducted with 11 literature databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. The quality assessment of each included article was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool. Meta-analyses were conducted for each personality type within the United States in the past 50 years, and in each country in the past 20 years.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles (17 reports) were included after the eligibility assessment. The longitudinal trends within the United States showed the predominant two personality types have changed from Extraversion, Sensing, Feeling, and Judging (ESFJ) and Extraversion, Sensing, Thinking, and Judging (ESTJ) to ESTJ and Introversion, Sensing, Thinking, and Judging (ISTJ) during the past 50 years. When comparing different countries, the United States, China, Korea, and Iran have the same two dominant personality types (ESTJ and ISTJ) but not the Philippines (Extraversion, Intuition, Feeling, and Perceiving and Introversion, Intuition, Feeling, and Perceiving). However, there are large variations in the prevalence of other personality types.

CONCLUSION

There have been constant changes in the predominant personalities of dental students over the years. Additionally, understanding the diversity of personality types within the United States as well as among different countries could serve as the foundation for further improvements in teaching strategies and student support services.

Use of Personality Frameworks in Health Science Education

Objectives. To review the use of personality frameworks by educators as a tool to increase self-awareness in health professions students. Findings. After screening titles, abstracts, and/or the full text of the 415 articles identified in an initial search, 71 articles involving personality frameworks were included in the study. Several different personality frameworks, including the Five-Factor Model, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, the Rational Experiential Inventory, and the CliftonStrengths assessment, were used in various health science education disciplines, including medicine, nursing, and pharmacy. Most publications were descriptive in nature and only reported on the personality attributes of the given research cohort. Some studies correlated personality framework results with either learning or non-cognitive outcomes. Very few studies described using personality frameworks as a tool for self-awareness and growth. Summary. While some personality frameworks have been used in health science education for multiple purposes, there is currently a lack of published evidence documenting the use of these frameworks for self-awareness in students.

Predicting performance in health professions education programs from admissions information - Comparisons of other health professions with pharmacy

BACKGROUND

The goal of the present review was to assess the state of performance prediction in healthcare programs generally, versus performance prediction in pharmacy schools, using didactic and non-didactic admissions measures. This is important because clinical success represents a combination of skills that are not fully predicted by either type of measure alone.

METHODS

PubMed searches were conducted focusing on work published from 2000 onwards, since it is during this period that non-didactic admissions measures have come to be incorporated into the applicant evaluation process. Relevant free full text papers available were used. When these papers were not available by direct import into EndNote, we went directly to the journal to try to retrieve the paper.

RESULTS

We acknowledge that health professions programs have been successful in recruiting excellent candidates into their schools. However, based on the modest amount of healthcare program performance accounted for by didactic measures, admissions committees should consider expanding their holistic evaluation of applicants. Schools would benefit from using two-step screening phases in the application process - perhaps evaluating didactic potential in phase 1 and experiential in phase 2. Using combination measures throughout the admission process should help ensure admission of students more likely to be successful throughout their healthcare practice.

IMPLICATIONS

Future investigations of the prediction of healthcare program performance by formal combinations of didactic and non-didactic admissions measures are imperative. In addition, it is likely that combination admission measures will incorporate more metrics of critical thinking than do simpler approaches. Furthermore, systematic evaluation of the usefulness of the two-step screening approaches to admissions used by most competitive health professions programs also needs to be done.