UW percentage correlates to what?

[BobBarker]

Know this has been covered but a quick search didn't turn anything up..

Just started USMLE World on Monday night. So far I've done 920 questions with 56% correct with a definite upward trend (averaging in the 60's today over 300 questions). What is the general consensus with how your UW percentage correlates with Step 1? I just want to ensure myself a great shot at a score above 220. I test June 4th.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Blesbok]

Know this has been covered but a quick search didn't turn anything up..

Just started USMLE World on Monday night. So far I've done 920 questions with 56% correct with a definite upward trend (averaging in the 60's today over 300 questions). What is the general consensus with how your UW percentage correlates with Step 1? I just want to ensure myself a great shot at a score above 220. I test June 4th.

You are wasting your time if you are managing 300 questions a day.

 

[BobBarker]

You are wasting your time if you are managing 300 questions a day.

Why do you say that? It takes me around 1.5 hours to do 50 in tutor mode, reading the full explanation on questions I get incorrect, just skimming the answers on questions I get correct. I'm a very fast reader. I was always in the first 5 students to finish exams throughout college and med school.

 

[peter90036]

uhm ok so just finish UW,

do NBME - that will correlate to the real exam score.

 

[DwyaneWade]

Why do you say that? It takes me around 1.5 hours to do 50 in tutor mode, reading the full explanation on questions I get incorrect, just skimming the answers on questions I get correct. I'm a very fast reader. I was always in the first 5 students to finish exams throughout college and med school.

Still that equates to 9 hours a day of UW, and how much of other studying?

Different strokes for different folks, but personally I would mix in some reading as well.

As for your original question, I'm pretty sure with low 60s in UW you have a very good shot at 220+.

 

[AK_MD2BE]

I am not sure how somebody derived this formula, but it appears pretty accureate.
UWorld % (e.g. 60) x 2.4 + 84 = 228.

 

[BobBarker]

I just like doing qbanks much more than reading. I fatigue less, and can study for much, much longer.

 

[Blesbok]

Why do you say that? It takes me around 1.5 hours to do 50 in tutor mode, reading the full explanation on questions I get incorrect, just skimming the answers on questions I get correct. I'm a very fast reader. I was always in the first 5 students to finish exams throughout college and med school.

Because you should really be reading over the entire answer even if you got it correct, because most answers have a lot of information that may not be directly related to the correct answer, but to all the other answers.

 

[-Goose-]

I am not sure how somebody derived this formula, but it appears pretty accureate.
UWorld % (e.g. 60) x 2.4 + 84 = 228.

Good Lord I hope that is true

 

[DwyaneWade]

Good Lord I hope that is true

That formula seems remarkably generous.

 

[Rogue Synapse]

Because you should really be reading over the entire answer even if you got it correct, because most answers have a lot of information that may not be directly related to the correct answer, but to all the other answers.

Negative. Reading the explanations for answers you got right for ancillary details is so extremely ridiculously low-yield. Even if you were able to get an answer based solely on an educated guess, it's not worth it to do more than quickly review the explanation and move on. Pausing and really reviewing the questions that completely slaughtered you is where you will really rack up the points for actual test day. I've had to train myself not to get mired down in reading about stuff I already know. That's my advice to you, which was passed down to me by some professional testing experts.

 

[Blesbok]

that is fine to listen to so called testing experts but i think i will stick with what worked for me. UWs explanations cover quite a bit of high yield material in all of their explanations, unlike kaplan

 

[agranulocytosis]

that is fine to listen to so called testing experts but i think i will stick with what worked for me. UWs explanations cover quite a bit of high yield material in all of their explanations, unlike kaplan

For the vast majority of the time, I know the reason the answer is correct and the other are not. I guess it just boils down to how a person answers a question i.e. if you look through each of the answers and talk yourself into one of them versus picking one because it stuck out at you. However, it really helps to fully understand each explanation for those questions that I guessed on or didn't think 100% about, and of course the ones I get wrong. For the most part, I'd agree with Rogue on this one.

 

[jbuck824]

I am not sure how somebody derived this formula, but it appears pretty accureate.
UWorld % (e.g. 60) x 2.4 + 84 = 228.

i've also heard 2.3* %+84....either way bro 300 questions a day is sick....at that rate you will finish world in a week and you still have what 11 days...

 

[lankysudanese]

Because you should really be reading over the entire answer even if you got it correct, because most answers have a lot of information that may not be directly related to the correct answer, but to all the other answers.

absolutely true. you should read the entire explanation in detail in order to truly take advantage of this great qbank. this takes dedication, especially when it comes to explanations for questions that you answered correctly.

 

[registered user]

I am not sure how somebody derived this formula, but it appears pretty accureate.
UWorld % (e.g. 60) x 2.4 + 84 = 228.

This formula predicted my score within 1 point of the actual test.

 

[alpha06]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If this formula is correct, then I'm lookin at a 221.

UW average: 57%. (57 x 2.4) + 84 = 221

But according to NBME 5 which I took yesterday: 190.

That seems like a big difference....

 

[Lany]

not sure if this has been brought up.. but would like some opinions.

when you get a score for block of 50.. i seem to be getting few percentage above the average of all uw users. If uw average for all those who took it is 52%, im in the range of 2% above that. Its interesting because in a block where i get 48%.. the rest would get 46% whereas when i get 60.. the rest would get 56 or so.

basically the question goes.. the average in uw given.. would it correlate somewhat to the mean score of 215? or where do the mid 50% of all people fall in, in terms of step1? (90% being the pass rate n all). Has anyone pondered on this. lately been getting 65-68.. but still interested on this.

maybe lookin for some reassurance after experiencing schizoid type of behavior lately. thnx. yes.. i will take nbme soon for those who are gonna jump to sayin.. take nbme..

 

[BabyPsychDoc]

Negative. Reading the explanations for answers you got right for ancillary details is so extremely ridiculously low-yield. Even if you were able to get an answer based solely on an educated guess, it's not worth it to do more than quickly review the explanation and move on. Pausing and really reviewing the questions that completely slaughtered you is where you will really rack up the points for actual test day. I've had to train myself not to get mired down in reading about stuff I already know. That's my advice to you, which was passed down to me by some professional testing experts.

Class of 2010, huh? So, not taken the real thing yet?

 

[78222]

Good Lord I hope that is true

It was +-1 point from the average of my last weeks timed, random, 50 question blocks.

 

[78222]

Negative. Reading the explanations for answers you got right for ancillary details is so extremely ridiculously low-yield. Even if you were able to get an answer based solely on an educated guess, it's not worth it to do more than quickly review the explanation and move on. Pausing and really reviewing the questions that completely slaughtered you is where you will really rack up the points for actual test day. I've had to train myself not to get mired down in reading about stuff I already know. That's my advice to you, which was passed down to me by some professional testing experts.

I disagree. I got a lot out of reading the answers to questions I got correct. I think it is important to read ALL explanations, even if you just skim the ones you knew the answer to.

 

[TinyFish]

I also got a lot out of reading/skimming answers to all questions. Ideally, I agree with all above who advise to read all answers to all questions. Whether you can do this or not probably depends on how much time you have to study and how efficient you are. I ended up only skimming the questions that I got right, and focusing on the wrong answers to those questions and why they were wrong; also read carefully all the answers that I got wrong and took notes.

From what I've heard here, it seems that if you're in the mid-60's by the end, you should be okay, although peoples' experience w/ UW correlations to real scores varies.

I had:
4 wks to study
UW for the first 250 or so Q's = in the 50's
UW = 69% cum. on random, timed tests (getting high 70's, 80's at the end)
NBME 2 = 255
NBME 4 = 258
Step 1 = 257

 

[Rogue Synapse]

In retrospect, I sound kind of like a know-it-all. BabyPsychDoc is right, I haven't taken Step 1 yet. Maybe I just have slightly different goals than those of you who are being very meticulous about your review. I'm in more of a triage mode, where I'm desperately trying to fill in giant gaps in my knowledge rather than supplement an already well-rounded mastery.

I take my exam June 10. I'm exactly halfway through UW, and about a third of the way through Kaplan Qbank, because I just use that to supplement World and as a self-esteem booster for when World crushes me. My UW percent correct is 63, and it's absolutely not budging from that, not matter how many new systems I do. I'm wondering about the NBMEs - I've never taken one. How much do they cost, and have they really helped you hone in on your weak areas more than just your UW percent correct in various areas?

 

[blz]

I agree with the people who just skimmed the questions they got right and read the full explanations of questions they got wrong. In the end though, either strategy can get you a 260+ score. I just have to reiterate though that not everyone has months to study for this test so spending hours on low yield explanations can be a detriment to the people who actually have a fixed length of time to study (although I was trying to do both UW and Qbank). Keep in mind though that I used A LOT of review books to supplement my knowledge as well so I did get my equal share of low yield material.


In terms of the correlation, it seems that a consistent correlation exists at the extremes of scores. That is, people scoring in the 75%+ range will go on to stomp the test (easily 250+) while those scoring in the <50% range will barely pass or at best get near average. This is when using the avg over the last 300 questions.