Association of USMLE Step 1 Pass/Fail Reporting with Interview and Match Outcomes

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Surgical Education Pub Date : 2024-07-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.06.019
{"title":"Association of USMLE Step 1 Pass/Fail Reporting with Interview and Match Outcomes","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.06.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>To investigate interview and match outcomes of medical students who received pass/fail USMLE reporting vs medical students with numeric scoring during the same period.</p></div><div><h3>DESIGN</h3><p>Retrospective analysis of a cross-sectional survey-based study.</p></div><div><h3>SETTING</h3><p>United States 2023 residency match.</p></div><div><h3>PARTICIPANTS</h3><p>Medical student applicants in the 2023 residency match cycle who responded to the Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency (STAR) survey.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><p>Among 6756 applicants for the 2023 match, 496 (7.3%) took USMLE Step 1 with pass/fail reporting. Pass/fail reporting was associated with lower USMLE Step 2-CK scores (245.9 vs 250.7), fewer honored clerkships (2.4 vs 3.1), and lower Alpha Omega Alpha membership (12.5% vs 25.2%) (all p &lt; 0.001). Applicants with numeric USMLE Step 1 scores received more interview offers after adjusting for academic performance (beta coefficient 1.04 (95% CI 0.28-1.79); p = 0.007). Numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring was associated with more interview offers in nonsurgical specialties (beta coefficient 1.64 [95% CI 0.74-2.53]; p &lt; 0.001), but not in general surgery (beta coefficient 3.01 [95% CI −0.82 to 6.84]; p = 0.123) or surgical subspecialties (beta coefficient 1.92 [95% CI −0.78 to 4.62]; p = 0.163). Numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring was not associated with match outcome.</p></div><div><h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3><p>Applicants with numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring had stronger academic profiles than those with pass/fail scoring; however, adjusted analyses found only weak associations with interview or match outcomes. Further research is warranted to assess longitudinal outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1931720424002915","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate interview and match outcomes of medical students who received pass/fail USMLE reporting vs medical students with numeric scoring during the same period.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a cross-sectional survey-based study.

SETTING

United States 2023 residency match.

PARTICIPANTS

Medical student applicants in the 2023 residency match cycle who responded to the Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency (STAR) survey.

RESULTS

Among 6756 applicants for the 2023 match, 496 (7.3%) took USMLE Step 1 with pass/fail reporting. Pass/fail reporting was associated with lower USMLE Step 2-CK scores (245.9 vs 250.7), fewer honored clerkships (2.4 vs 3.1), and lower Alpha Omega Alpha membership (12.5% vs 25.2%) (all p < 0.001). Applicants with numeric USMLE Step 1 scores received more interview offers after adjusting for academic performance (beta coefficient 1.04 (95% CI 0.28-1.79); p = 0.007). Numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring was associated with more interview offers in nonsurgical specialties (beta coefficient 1.64 [95% CI 0.74-2.53]; p < 0.001), but not in general surgery (beta coefficient 3.01 [95% CI −0.82 to 6.84]; p = 0.123) or surgical subspecialties (beta coefficient 1.92 [95% CI −0.78 to 4.62]; p = 0.163). Numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring was not associated with match outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Applicants with numeric USMLE Step 1 scoring had stronger academic profiles than those with pass/fail scoring; however, adjusted analyses found only weak associations with interview or match outcomes. Further research is warranted to assess longitudinal outcomes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
USMLE 第 1 步通过/未通过报告与面试和匹配结果的关联。
目的调查接受美国医学考试合格/不合格报告的医学生与同期接受数字评分的医学生的面试和匹配结果:设计:基于横断面调查的回顾性分析:参与者:参加2023年美国住院医师考试的医学生申请人:结果:在 6756 名 2023 年住院医师考试的申请人中,有 6756 人对住院医师考试的分数进行了公布,其中有 6756 人对住院医师考试的分数进行了公布,其中有 6756 人对住院医师考试的分数进行了公布:在 6756 名参加 2023 年匹配的申请人中,有 496 人(7.3%)参加了 USMLE 第 1 步考试,并提交了及格/不及格报告。通过/未通过报告与较低的 USMLE 第 2 步-CK 分数(245.9 vs 250.7)、较少的荣誉实习(2.4 vs 3.1)和较低的 Alpha Omega Alpha 会员资格(12.5% vs 25.2%)有关(所有 p <0.001)。在调整学业成绩后,USMLE 第 1 步数字分数申请者获得的面试机会更多(β 系数 1.04 (95% CI 0.28-1.79);p = 0.007)。数值型 USMLE 第 1 步考试成绩与非外科专业(贝塔系数 1.64 [95% CI 0.74-2.53];p < 0.001)的更多面试机会有关,但与普通外科(贝塔系数 3.01 [95% CI -0.82 至 6.84];p = 0.123)或外科亚专业(贝塔系数 1.92 [95% CI -0.78 至 4.62];p = 0.163)无关。USMLE 第 1 步的数字评分与匹配结果无关:结论:USMLE 第 1 步数字评分的申请者比及格/不及格评分的申请者具有更强的学术背景;然而,调整后的分析发现与面试或匹配结果只有微弱的关联。需要进一步研究以评估纵向结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Surgical Education
Journal of Surgical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
261
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Education (JSE) is dedicated to advancing the field of surgical education through original research. The journal publishes research articles in all surgical disciplines on topics relative to the education of surgical students, residents, and fellows, as well as practicing surgeons. Our readers look to JSE for timely, innovative research findings from the international surgical education community. As the official journal of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS), JSE publishes the proceedings of the annual APDS meeting held during Surgery Education Week.
期刊最新文献
Resident-Applicant Buddy Program Increases Applicant Interest and Program Transparency Promoting Surgical Resident Well-being Through Therapist-Facilitated Discussion Groups: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Geographic Match Location Patterns: Comparison of Pre and Post Virtual Interviews General Surgery Residency Applicant Perspectives on Alternative Residency Interview Models with Implementation of an Optional Second Look Day Implementation and Evaluation of an Academic Development Rotation for Surgery Residents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1