BACKGROUND Gateway courses are increasingly popular widening participation routes into medicine. These six year courses provide a more accessible entry route into medical school and aim to support under-represented students' progress and graduation as doctors. There is little evidence on the performance of gateway students and this study compares attainment and aptitude on entry, and outcomes at graduation of students on the UK's three longest running gateway courses with students studying on a standard entry medical degree (SEMED) course at the same institutions. METHODS Data were obtained from the UK Medical Education Database for students starting between 2007 and 2012 at three UK institutions. These data included A-levels and Universities Clinical Aptitude Test scores on entry to medical school and the Educational Performance Measure (EPM) decile, Situational Judgement Test (SJT) and Prescribing Safety Assessment (PSA) scores as outcomes measures. Multiple regression models were used to test for difference in outcomes between the two types of course, controlling for attainment and aptitude on entry. RESULTS Four thounsand three hundred forty students were included in the analysis, 560 on gateway courses and 3785 on SEMED courses. Students on SEMED courses had higher attainment (Cohen's d = 1.338) and aptitude (Cohen's d = 1.078) on entry. On exit SEMED students had higher EPM scores (Cohen's d = 0.616) and PSA scores (Cohen's d = 0.653). When accounting for attainment and aptitude on entry course type is still a significant predictor of EPM and PSA, but the proportion of the variation in outcome explained by course type drops from 6.4 to 1.6% for EPM Decile and from 5.3% to less than 1% for the PSA score. There is a smaller significant difference in SJT scores, with SEMED having higher scores (Cohen's d = 0.114). However, when measures of performance on entry are accounted for, course type is no longer a significant predictor of SJT scores. CONCLUSIONS This study shows the differences of the available measures between gateway students and SEMED students on entry to their medical degrees are greater than the differences on exit. This provides modest evidence that gateway courses allow students from under-represented groups to achieve greater academic potential.

中文翻译：

---

衔接课程和标准入学医学课程学生的本科生成绩比较。

背景技术入门课程越来越受欢迎，将参与途径扩展到医学领域。这六年课程为进入医学院校提供了更方便的入学途径，旨在支持代表性不足的学生的进步和以医生的身份毕业。关于衔接课程学生表现的证据很少，本研究比较了英国三门最长的衔接课程与同一门标准入门医学学位（SEMED）课程学习的学生在入学方面的成就和才能，以及学生毕业后的结果。机构。方法：数据来自英国医学教育数据库，从2007年至2012年在英国三所机构就读。这些数据包括入学时的A级和大学临床能力测验分数以及教育绩效评估（EPM）十等分，情境判断测试（SJT）和处方安全评估（PSA）分数作为结果评估。多元回归模型用于检验两种课程之间的结局差异，控制入学成绩和能力。结果分析中包括四名学生和三百四十名学生，入门课程560名，SEMED课程3785名。参加SEMED课程的学生入学时具有较高的素养（Cohen d = 1.338）和才能（Cohen's d = 1.078）。在SEMED退出时，学生的EPM得分（科恩d = 0.616）和PSA得分（科恩d = 0.653）更高。当考虑入学课程类型的成就和能力仍然是EPM和PSA的重要预测指标时，但按课程类型解释的结局差异的比例从EPM十分位数从6.4％降至1.6％，从5.3％降至低于1％ PSA分数。SJT得分差异较小，而SEMED得分更高（Cohen d = 0.114）。但是，考虑到入学成绩时，课程类型不再是SJT分数的重要预测指标。结论本研究表明，衔接课程的学生和SEMED学生在进入医学学位课程时可以采取的措施之间的差异要大于退出时的差异。这提供了适度的证据，表明衔接课程允许来自代表性不足的群体的学生实现更大的学术潜力。