A call for greater transparency in the evidence base supporting the BMAT

Dear Sir

The BioMedical Admissions Test (BMAT) and the United Kingdom Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT) are the two major aptitude tests used for the selection of medical students in the UK. The importance of using evidence-based practices in admissions processes is undeniable, as is the need for the evidence to be more transparent and accessible. Whilst the predictive validity of the UKCAT has been well established by peer-reviewed publications, there has been a relative paucity in the peer-reviewed evidence supporting the use of the BMAT.

Accordingly, we advocate that the evidence base for the BMAT be expanded. Specifically, it is necessary to improve access to existing unpublished data held by admissions offices, and for the effectiveness of the BMAT to be assessed using rigorous, peer-approved research methods. The advantage of promoting this is two-fold. Firstly, the peer-reviewed evidence evaluating the predictive validity of the BMAT (Emery & Bell 2009), albeit convincing, is solely limited to the University of Cambridge, which follows a traditional course structure with a prominent pre-clinical/clinical divide. Further studies to probe the applicability of the BMAT at institutions with different course styles will provide a more comprehensive overview on its effectiveness in candidate selection. This issue is particularly pertinent as institutions such as the University of Leeds and Brighton and Sussex Medical School begin incorporating the BMAT into their admissions processes. Secondly, much of the evidence pertaining to the BMAT is provided by its developers, Cambridge Assessment. The use of the BMAT will be more robustly supported by peer-reviewed articles written by independent authors than by reports published by Cambridge Assessment, who may have vested interests in the outcomes of any study they carry out.

To conclude, we are concerned by the apparent disparities in the evidence base supporting the UKCAT and the BMAT. We believe that evidence-based practices involving the use of the BMAT should be ultimately held to the same standards as that of the UKCAT.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest.