{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04732690622261174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026292725679228746, 'mean_word_length': 5.525714285714286, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Perceptions and Cost-Analysis of a Multiple Mini-Interview in a Pharmacy School Admissions Process

Objective. To improve the quality of admissions interviews for a doctor of pharmacy program, using a multiple mini-interview (MMI) in place of the standard interview. Methods. Stakeholders completed an anonymous web-based survey. This study characterized perceptions of the MMI format across 3 major stakeholders (candidates, interviewers, admissions committee members) and included comparative cost estimates.Costs were estimated using human and facility resources from the 2012 cycle (standard format) and the 2013 cycle (MMI format). Results. Most candidates (65%), interviewers (86%), and admissions committee members (79%) perceived the MMI format as effective for evaluating applicants, and most (59% of candidates, 84% of interviewers, 77% of committee members) agreed that the MMI format should be continued. Cost per candidate interviewed was $136.34 (standard interview) vs $75.30 (MMI). Conclusion. Perceptions of the MMI process were favorable across stakeholder groups, and this format was less costly per candidate interviewed.