Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: A retrospective study over a 20-year period

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 120-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Robert Burns ◽  
Judy Garrett
1999 ◽  
Vol 74 (10) ◽  
pp. S7-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
D P Way ◽  
B Biagi ◽  
K Clausen ◽  
A Hudson

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Wang ◽  
Heather S. Laird-Fick ◽  
Carol J. Parker ◽  
David Solomon

Abstract Background Medical students must meet curricular expectations and pass national licensing examinations to become physicians. However, no previous studies explicitly modeled stages of medical students acquiring basic science knowledge. In this study, we employed an innovative statistical model to characterize students’ growth using progress testing results over time and predict licensing examination performance. Methods All students matriculated from 2016 to 2017 in our medical school with USMLE Step 1 test scores were included in this retrospective cohort study (N = 358). Markov chain method was employed to: 1) identify latent states of acquiring scientific knowledge based on progress tests and 2) estimate students’ transition probabilities between states. The primary outcome of this study, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 performance, were predicted based on students’ estimated probabilities in each latent state identified by Markov chain model. Results Four latent states were identified based on students’ progress test results: Novice, Advanced Beginner I, Advanced Beginner II and Competent States. At the end of the first year, students predicted to remain in the Novice state had lower mean Step 1 scores compared to those in the Competent state (209, SD = 14.8 versus 255, SD = 10.8 respectively) and had more first attempt failures (11.5% versus 0%). On regression analysis, it is found that at the end of the first year, if there was 10% higher chance staying in Novice State, Step 1 scores will be predicted 2.0 points lower (95% CI: 0.85–2.81 with P < .01); while 10% higher chance in Competent State, Step 1scores will be predicted 4.3 points higher (95% CI: 2.92–5.19 with P < .01). Similar findings were also found at the end of second year medical school. Conclusions Using the Markov chain model to analyze longitudinal progress test performance offers a flexible and effective estimation method to identify students’ transitions across latent stages for acquiring scientific knowledge. The results can help identify students who are at-risk for licensing examination failure and may benefit from targeted academic support.


1997 ◽  
Vol 72 (12) ◽  
pp. 1097-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
R H Glew ◽  
D R Ripkey ◽  
D B Swanson

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 610-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mei Liang ◽  
Laurie S. Curtin ◽  
Mona M. Signer ◽  
Maria C. Savoia

ABSTRACT Background  Over the past decade, the number of unfilled positions in the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Main Residency Match has declined by one-third, while the number of unmatched applicants has grown by more than 50%, largely due to a rise in the number of international medical school students and graduates (IMGs). Although only half of IMG participants historically have matched to a first-year position, the Match experiences of unmatched IMGs have not been studied. Objective  We examined differences in interview and ranking behaviors between matched and unmatched IMGs participating in the 2013 Match and explored strategic errors made by unmatched IMGs when creating rank order lists. Methods  Rank order lists of IMGs who failed to match were analyzed in conjunction with their United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores and responses on the 2013 NRMP Applicant Survey. IMGs were categorized as “strong,” “solid,” “marginal,” or “weak” based on the perceived competitiveness of their USMLE Step 1 scores compared to other IMG applicants who matched in the same specialty. We examined ranking preferences and strategies by Match outcome. Results  Most unmatched IMGs were categorized as “marginal” or “weak”. However, unmatched IMGs who were non-US citizens presented more competitive USMLE Step 1 scores compared to unmatched IMGs who were US citizens. Unmatched IMGs were more likely than matched IMGs to rank programs at which they did not interview and to rank programs based on their perceived likelihood of matching. Conclusions  The interview and ranking behaviors of IMGs can have far-reaching consequences on their Match experience and outcomes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa R. Johnson ◽  
Mohammed K. Khalil ◽  
Richard D. Peppler ◽  
Diane D. Davey ◽  
Jonathan D. Kibble

In the present study, we describe the innovative use of the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Comprehensive Basic Science Examination (CBSE) as a progress test during the preclerkship medical curriculum. The main aim of this study was to provide external validation of internally developed multiple-choice assessments in a new medical school. The CBSE is a practice exam for the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and is purchased directly from the NBME. We administered the CBSE five times during the first 2 yr of medical school. Student scores were compared with scores on newly created internal summative exams and to the USMLE Step 1. Significant correlations were observed between almost all our internal exams and CBSE scores over time as well as with USMLE Step 1 scores. The strength of correlations of internal exams to the CBSE and USMLE Step 1 broadly increased over time during the curriculum. Student scores on courses that have strong emphasis on physiology and pathophysiology correlated particularly well with USMLE Step 1 scores. Student progress, as measured by the CBSE, was found to be linear across time, and test performance fell behind the anticipated level by the end of the formal curriculum. These findings are discussed with respect to student learning behaviors. In conclusion, the CBSE was found to have good utility as a progress test and provided external validation of our new internally developed multiple-choice assessments. The data also provide performance benchmarks both for our future students to formatively assess their own progress and for other medical schools to compare learning progression patterns in different curricular models.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Misbah Keen ◽  
Danielle Bienz ◽  
Toby Keys ◽  
Douglas Schaad ◽  
David Evans

Introduction: The University of Washington School of Medicine has six campuses in the five state WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) region. The WRITE (WWAMI Rural Integrated Training Experience) program is a 22 to 24 week long rural longitudinal integrated clerkship experience offered to medical students in their clinical phase (third year) of training. This program seeks to meet the rural workforce needs of the WWAMI region by increasing the number of medical students going into primary care. Critics of LIC’s have expressed concern about overall quality control of the more remote educational experience and the lack of specialty specific teaching.  The aim of this study was to compare medical school and PGY-1 performance of WRITE and Non-WRITE students while determining how well each cohort is meeting the regional workforce needs. Methods: The study group was all UWSOM students who matriculated from 2009 to 2013, advanced to graduation, and subsequently matched to a residency through the National Residency Match Program. WRITE and non-WRITE cohorts were compared for USMLE step 1 and 2 scores, MSPE (Medical Student Performance Evaluation) key word, and self and program director assessments in the first year of residency. The match results of the two cohorts were also compared to determine the proportions entering primary care residencies. Finally, for both cohorts the specialty choice at matriculation was compared with the match results. Descriptive statistics were used to test the comparisons. Results: The medical school performance of the WRITE and Non-WRITE cohorts was equivalent in all metrics (USMLE Step 1 and 2, MSPE key word, self and program director assessment of performance in the first year of residency). WRITE students were significantly more likely to match into primary care (67.6% vs 48.3%, p<0.001) overall and, in particular, Family Medicine as their specialty (40% vs 14.3%, p<0.001).  WRITE students were also more likely to match into the same specialty that they indicated on the UWSOM matriculation survey. For Family Medicine the loss of fidelity between matriculation and match among WRITE students was 3% (43.4 - 40.4) and among Non-WRITE students, it was 6.3% (20.6 - 14.3). Conclusions: Performance outcomes of the WRITE program are equivalent to a traditional block curriculum.  However, the WRITE cohort is significantly more likely to go into primary care fields, especially family medicine and is more likely to stay with the declared specialty at matriculation. Medical schools that seek to increase the number of students going into primary care may benefit from adopting a similar model.


JAMA ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 311 (13) ◽  
pp. 1358 ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. Barbieri

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document