Holistic Review in Applicant Selection: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Purpose: To avoid overreliance on metrics and better identify candidates who add value to the learning environment, some medical schools and residency programs have begun using holistic review for screening and selection, but limited data support or refute this use. This scoping review examines holistic review definitions and practice in medical education, summarizes research findings, and identifies gaps for future research.

Method: The authors searched 7 databases using a comprehensive search strategy including the keywords holistic, attributes, mission-based, mission-centric , and socially accountable for articles on holistic review within undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME) published from database inception through July 5, 2024. Author pairs independently screened articles for inclusion and extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion. Quantitative and qualitative synthesis was performed.

Results: 6,511 articles were identified, with 33 included in this review. Twenty-five studies (76%) focused exclusively on GME, with only a few assessing holistic review in UME. Holistic review was implemented at 3 main stages: screening, interviewing, and ranking. Common rationales included service patterns, patient-physician identity concordance, enhancing patient trust, professional advocacy, and educational benefits. Holistic review elements varied, with most falling within the Association of American Medical Colleges experiences, attributes, and metrics framework. Nearly all studies reported an increase in the percentage of underrepresented in medicine trainees interviewed or selected. Several studies also demonstrated increases in other groups (e.g., women, lower socioeconomic status). Many studies included additional interventions to promote diversity, limiting the ability to assess holistic review in isolation.

Conclusions: This scoping review summarizes the literature on the rationale, development and implementation process, structure and components, outcomes assessed, barriers, and strategies for success for holistic review. This work can inform institutions and departments seeking to develop or refine their own holistic review systems and serve as a nidus for future research.

Figure 1

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram for studies included in this review of articles on holistic review within undergraduate medical education and graduate medical education published from database inception to July 5, 2024.