The State of the Otolaryngology Match: A Review of Applicant Trends, “Impossible” Qualifications, and Implications

2017 ◽  
Vol 156 (6) ◽  
pp. 985-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah N. Bowe ◽  
Cecelia E. Schmalbach ◽  
Adrienne M. Laury
Keyword(s):  
The Past ◽  
Application Service ◽  
Research Publications ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Residency Application ◽  
The Relationship

Objective This State of the Art Review aims (1) to define recent qualifications of otolaryngology resident applicants by focusing on United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status, and research/publications and (2) to summarize the current literature regarding the relationship between these measures and performance in residency. Data Sources Electronic Residency Application Service, National Residency Matching Program, PubMed, Ovid, and GoogleScholar. Review Methods Electronic Residency Application Service and National Residency Matching Program data were analyzed to evaluate trends in applicant numbers and qualifications. Additionally, a literature search was performed with the aforementioned databases to identify relevant articles published in the past 5 years that examined USMLE Step 1 scores, AOA status, and research/publications. Conclusions Compared with other highly competitive fields over the past 3 years, the only specialty with decreasing applicant numbers is otolaryngology, with the rest remaining relatively stable or slightly increased. Additionally, USMLE Step 1 scores, AOA status, and research/publications do not reliably correlate with performance in residency. Implications for Practice The consistent decline in applications for otolaryngology residency is concerning and reflects a need for change in the current stereotype of the “ideal” otolaryngology applicant. This includes consideration of additional selection measures focusing on noncognitive and holistic qualities. Furthermore, otolaryngology faculty should counsel medical students that applying in otolaryngology is not “impossible” but rather a feasible and worthwhile endeavor.

scholarly journals Ophthalmology Program Director Perspectives of Scoring Step 1 Pass/Fail

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. e251-e254
Author(s):  
Saif A. Hamdan ◽  
Alan T. Makhoul ◽  
Brian C. Drolet ◽  
Jennifer L. Lindsey ◽  
Janice C. Law
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Application Process ◽  
Medical Graduates ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Residency Application ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Scoring for the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 was recently announced to be reported as binary as early as 2022. The general perception among program directors (PDs) in all specialties has largely been negative, but the perspective within ophthalmology remains uncharacterized. Objective This article characterizes ophthalmology residency PDs' perspectives regarding the impact of pass/fail USMLE Step 1 scoring on the residency application process. Methods A validated 19-item anonymous survey was electronically distributed to 111 PDs of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited ophthalmology training programs. Results Fifty-six PDs (50.5%) completed the survey. The median age of respondents was 48 years and the majority were male (71.4%); the average tenure as PD was 7.1 years. Only 6 (10.7%) PDs reported the change of the USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail was a good idea. Most PDs (92.9%) indicated that this will make it more difficult to objectively compare applicants, and many (69.6%) did not agree that the change would improve medical student well-being. The majority (82.1%) indicated that there will be an increased emphasis on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores, and many (70.4%) felt that medical school reputation will be more important in application decisions. Conclusion Most ophthalmology PDs who responded to the survey do not support binary Step 1 scoring. Many raised concerns regarding shifted overemphasis on Step 2 CK, uncertain impact on student well-being, and potential to disadvantage certain groups of medical students including international medical graduates. These concerns highlight the need for reform in the ophthalmology application process.

scholarly journals Understanding the Interview and Ranking Behaviors of Unmatched International Medical Students and Graduates in the 2013 Main Residency Match

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 610-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mei Liang ◽  
Laurie S. Curtin ◽  
Mona M. Signer ◽  
Maria C. Savoia
Keyword(s):  
Rank Order ◽  
International Medical ◽  
First Year ◽  
School Students ◽  
The Past ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Residency Match

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.

scholarly journals The Use of COMLEX-USA and USMLE for Residency Applicant Selection

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanne M. Sandella ◽  
John R. Gimpel ◽  
Larissa L. Smith ◽  
John R. Boulet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Strong Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Level 1 ◽  
State Medical Boards ◽  
Phi Coefficient

ABSTRACT  The Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX-USA) and the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) are recognized by all state medical licensing boards in the United States, and the Federation of State Medical Boards has supported the validity of both examinations for medical licensure. Many osteopathic medical students take both examinations.Background  The purpose of this study was to investigate performance on COMLEX-USA Level 1 and USMLE Step 1 of students from colleges of osteopathic medicine where the majority of students took both examinations.Objective  Data were collected on the entering classes of 2010 and 2011. Relationships between the COMLEX-USA Level 1 and the USMLE Step 1 were quantified using Pearson correlations. The correlation between outcomes on the 2 examinations was evaluated using the phi coefficient. A contingency table was constructed to look at first-attempt outcomes (pass/fail).Methods  Data for 2010 and 2011 were collected from 3 osteopathic medical schools, with 795 of 914 students (87%) taking both examinations. The correlation between first-attempt COMLEX-USA Level 1 and USMLE Step 1 scores was statistically significant across and within all 3 schools. The overall correlation was r(795) = 0.84 (P < .001). Pass/fail status on the 2 examinations was moderately correlated (ϕ = 0.39, P < .01).Results  Our study found a strong association between COMLEX Level 1 and USMLE Step 1 performance. Additional studies to accurately compare scores on these examinations are warranted.Conclusions

scholarly journals The United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Is Changing—US Medical Curricula Should Too

10.2196/20182 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e20182
Author(s):  
Benjamin Liu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Traditional Lectures ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step

In recent years, US medical students have been increasingly absent from medical school classrooms. They do so to maximize their competitiveness for a good residency program, by achieving high scores on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. As a US medical student, I know that most of these class-skipping students are utilizing external learning resources, which are perceived to be more efficient than traditional lectures. Now that the USMLE Step 1 is adopting a pass/fail grading system, it may be tempting to expect students to return to traditional basic science lectures. Unfortunately, my experiences tell me this will not happen. Instead, US medical schools must adapt their curricula. These new curricula should focus on clinical decision making, team-based learning, and new medical decision technologies, while leveraging the validated ability of these external resources to teach the basic sciences. In doing so, faculty will not only increase student engagement but also modernize the curricula to meet new standards on effective medical learning.

scholarly journals Potential Impact of Pass/Fail Scores on USMLE Step 1: Predictors of Excellence in Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Training

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 238212052110374
Author(s):  
Sejal Tamakuwala ◽  
Joshua Dean ◽  
Katherine J. Kramer ◽  
Adib Shafi ◽  
Sarah Ottum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Predictive Ability ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Resident Performance ◽  
Application Service ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Clerkship Grade ◽  
Residency Application

AIM The study aims to determine resident applicant metrics most predictive of academic and clinical performance as measured by the Council of Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CREOG) examination scores and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) clinical performance (Milestones) in the aftermath of United States Medical Licensing Examination Scores (USMLE) Step 1 becoming a pass/fail examination. METHODS In this retrospective study, electronic and paper documents for Wayne State University Obstetrics and Gynecology residents matriculated over a 5-year period ending July 2018 were collected. USMLE scores, clerkship grade, and wording on the letters of recommendation as well as Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) were extracted from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and scored numerically. Semiannual Milestone evaluations and yearly CREOG scores were used as a marker of resident performance. Statistical analysis on residents (n = 75) was performed using R and SPSS and significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS Mean USMLE score correlated with CREOG performance and, of all 3 Steps, Step 1 had the tightest association. MSPE and class percentile also correlated with CREOGs. Clerkship grade and recommendation letters had no correlation with resident performance. Of all metrics provided by ERAS, none taken alone, were as useful as Step 1 scores at predicting performance in residency. Regression modeling demonstrated that the combination of Step 2 scores with MSPE wording restored the predictive ability lost by Step 1. CONCLUSIONS The change of USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail may alter resident selection strategies. Other objective markers are needed in order to evaluate an applicant’s future performance in residency.

scholarly journals The United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Is Changing—US Medical Curricula Should Too (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Liu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Traditional Lectures ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Licensing Examination ◽  
Usmle Step

UNSTRUCTURED In recent years, US medical students have been increasingly absent from medical school classrooms. They do so to maximize their competitiveness for a good residency program, by achieving high scores on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. As a US medical student, I know that most of these class-skipping students are utilizing external learning resources, which are perceived to be more efficient than traditional lectures. Now that the USMLE Step 1 is adopting a pass/fail grading system, it may be tempting to expect students to return to traditional basic science lectures. Unfortunately, my experiences tell me this will not happen. Instead, US medical schools must adapt their curricula. These new curricula should focus on clinical decision making, team-based learning, and new medical decision technologies, while leveraging the validated ability of these external resources to teach the basic sciences. In doing so, faculty will not only increase student engagement but also modernize the curricula to meet new standards on effective medical learning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document