Dataset Information

Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Scoring-A Radiology Program Director Survey.

ABSTRACT: RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES:In February 2020, administrators for the US medical licensing examination (USMLE) announced that Step 1 reporting would change to pass/fail in hopes of reducing the overemphasis of USMLE performance on the residency selection system and improving medical student well-being. Our objective was to determine the perspectives of diagnostic radiology (DR), interventional radiology (IR), and nuclear medicine (NM) program directors (PDs) regarding pass/fail USMLE Step 1 scoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A survey composed of thirteen questions on a three-point Likert scale, five demographic questions, and a free-text question was distributed to 179 DR, 84 IR, and 34 NM PDs from ACGME-accredited residency programs. RESULTS:In total, 140 unique responses were obtained (response rate?=?47.1%). The PD respondents had a male predominance of 79.1%, average age of 46 ± 7.2 years, and average tenure of 5.9 ± 5.2 years. A majority of PDs (69.6%) disagreed that the change is a good idea, and a minority (21.6%) believe the change will improve medical student well-being. Further, 90.7% of PDs believe a pass/fail format will make it more difficult to objectively compare applicants and most will place more emphasis on USMLE Step 2 scores and medical school reputation (89.3% and 72.7%, respectively). CONCLUSION:The lasting impact of pass/fail Step 1 scoring are uncertain and many radiology PDs do not support this change. While the central motivations to reduce the overemphasis on USMLE Step 1 performance and improve medical student well-being are admirable, it remains to be seen if pass/fail scoring will accomplish these goals.

SUBMITTER: MacKinnon GE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7485567 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Scoring-A Radiology Program Director Survey.

MacKinnon Grant E GE Payne Sydney S Drolet Brian C BC Motuzas Cari C

Academic radiology 20200911 11

<h4>Rationale and objectives</h4>In February 2020, administrators for the US medical licensing examination (USMLE) announced that Step 1 reporting would change to pass/fail in hopes of reducing the overemphasis of USMLE performance on the residency selection system and improving medical student well-being. Our objective was to determine the perspectives of diagnostic radiology (DR), interventional radiology (IR), and nuclear medicine (NM) program directors (PDs) regarding pass/fail USMLE Step 1 ...[more]

PMID: 32928635

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnited States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 will transition from numeric grading to pass/fail, sometime after January 2022. The aim of this study was to compare how program directors in orthopaedics and internal medicine perceive a pass/fail Step 1 will impact the residency application process.MethodsA 27-item survey was distributed through REDCap to 161 U.S. orthopaedic residency program directors and 548 U.S. internal medicine residency program directors. Program director emails were obtained from the American Medical Association's Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database.ResultsWe received 58 (36.0%) orthopaedic and 125 (22.8%) internal medicine program director responses. The majority of both groups disagree with the change to pass/fail, and felt that the decision was not transparent. Both groups believe that the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exam and clerkship grades will take on more importance. Compared to internal medicine PDs, orthopaedic PDs were significantly more likely to emphasize research, letters of recommendation from known faculty, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, audition elective rotations, and personal knowledge of the applicant. Both groups believe that allopathic students from less prestigious medical schools, osteopathic students, and international medical graduates will be disadvantaged. Orthopaedic and internal medicine program directors agree that medical schools should adopt a graded pre-clinical curriculum, and that there should be a cap on the number of residency applications a student can submit.ConclusionOrthopaedic and internal medicine program directors disagree with the change of Step 1 to pass/fail. They also believe that this transition will make the match process more difficult, and disadvantage students from less highly-regarded medical schools. Both groups will rely more heavily on the Step 2 clinical knowledge exam score, but orthopaedics will place more importance on research, letters of recommendation, Alpha Omega Alpha membership, leadership/extracurricular activities, personal knowledge of the applicant, and audition electives.

Project description:BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of a change in preclerkship grading system from Honors/Pass/Fail (H/P/F) to Pass/Fail (P/F) on University of California, San Diego (UCSD) medical students' academic performance. METHODS: Academic performance of students in the classes of 2011 and 2012 (constant-grading classes) were collected and compared with performance of students in the class of 2013 (grading-change class) because the grading policy at UCSD SOM was changed for the class of 2013, from H/P/F during the first year (MS1) to P/F during the second year (MS2). For all students, data consisted of test scores from required preclinical courses from MS1 and MS2 years, and USMLE Step 1 scores. Linear regression analysis controlled for other factors that could be predictive of student performance (i.e., MCAT scores, undergraduate GPA, age, gender, etc.) in order to isolate the effect of the changed grading policy on academic performance. The change in grading policy in the MS2 year only, without any corresponding changes to the medical curriculum, presents a unique natural experiment with which to cleanly evaluate the effect of P/F grading on performance outcomes. RESULTS: After controlling for other factors, the grading policy change to P/F grading in the MS2 year had a negative impact on second-year grades relative to first-year grades (the constant-grading classes performed 1.65% points lower during their MS2 year compared to the MS1 year versus 3.25% points lower for the grading-change class, p?<?0.0001), but had no observable impact on USMLE Step 1 scores. CONCLUSIONS: A change in grading from H/P/F grading to P/F grading was associated with decreased performance on preclinical examinations but no decrease in performance on the USMLE Step 1 examination. These results are discussed in the broader context of the multitude of factors that should be considered in assessing the merits of various grading systems, and ultimately the authors recommend the continuation of pass-fail grading at UCSD School of Medicine.

Project description:BackgroundThe last formal review of academic anesthesiology department Web sites (ADWs) for content was conducted in 2009. ADWs have been rated as very important by medical students in researching residency training programs; however, the rapid evolution of sites require that descriptive statistics must be more current to be considered reliable. We set out to provide an updated overview of ADW content and to better understand residency program directors' (PD) role and comfort with ADWs.MethodsTwo independent reviewers (ND and HL) analyzed all 131 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited ADWs. A binary system (Yes/No) was used to determine which features were present. Reviewer reliability was confirmed with inter-rater reliability and percentage agreement calculation. Additionally, a blinded electronic survey (Survey Monkey, Portland, OR) was sent to anesthesiology residency PDs via electronic mail investigating the audiences for ADWs, the frequency of updates and the degree of PD involvement.Results13% of anesthesiology departments still lack a Web site with a homepage with links to the residency program and educational offerings (18% in 2009). Only half (55%) of Web sites contain information for medical students, including clerkship information. Furthermore, programs rarely contain up-to-date calendars (13%), accreditation cycle lengths (11%), accreditation dates (7%) or board pass rates (6%). The PD survey, completed by 42 of 131 PDs, noted a correlation (r = 0.36) between the number of years as PD and the frequency of Web site updates - less experienced PDs appear to update their sites more frequently (p = 0.03). Although 86% of PDs regarded a Web site as "very" important in recruitment, only 9% felt "very" comfortable with the skills required to advertise and market a Web site.ConclusionsDespite the overall increase in ADW content since 2009, privacy concerns, limited resources and time constraints may prevent PDs from providing the most up-to-date Web sites for applicants and other interested audiences. PDs are aware of value of Web sites for recruitment, are typically involved in determining ADW content, but few feel very comfortable marketing a training program on the Web.

Dataset Information

Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Scoring-A Radiology Program Director Survey.

Publications

Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Scoring-A Radiology Program Director Survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets