Are these a must?
Can you just assess yourself with USMLEworld questions?
Any constructive input will be appreciated.
I would say that they are. They are the best predictors of your score and the only material directly provided by the test makers. Also questions from the 4 NBME's often show up on the real thing.
I second this. I highly recommend that you do all 4 NBME exams unless you can not afford the 4 x $45 (in which case you should at least do 2 NBMEs).
4 x $45 ?? Is there a charge? I downloaded NBME from www.usmle.org for free. The 2007 & 2008 editions are available.
In my opinion based on feedback from a few years of SDN users, forms 2-4 are superior predictors to form 1.
They are newer tests so it is possible their questions are more up to date.
Thanks everyone for your input,
this is what I took away from this thread:
-It's not truly necessary.
-the NBME site claims that the tests aren't good predictors, yet students feel that they ARE good predictors? (weird) 0.o
-Tests 2-4 are better than test 1.
One other thing, people who use UW say that if you're scoring around a 60 on UW, that's a pretty good indicator that you'll past the Step 1.
I'm still undecided about the NBME's,,,, especially after the fact that you don't get explanations.
Not predictive? Take a look at the past score threads, 90% of the time NBME's predict within 5 pts.
They may not be great predictors, but they're the best predictors available
Just my opinion, but I gotta believe that many of the folks for whom it was not predictive aren't going to be posting as often. It's hard to ignore the multiple statements on the NBME site that the scores on these tests should not be used as an accurate prediction of how you will do on the real thing.
I think taking all four would be a lot of money for very little benefit. Sure, the questions show up again (sometimes) but some of my questions from UWorld were almost verbatim on Step 1 as well.
what about repeat predictiveness? i took nbme 1-3 however my test is in 5 days and i am actually scared to take 4 because my experience with 3. I thought nbme 3 was more appropriate if i was applying for a job with the Human Genome Project and my score dropped from a correlated 232 from Form 2 to a 224 in Form 3.
I was thinking of retaking Form 1 or 2 again as I really dont remember the questions or anything about the exam but I was hopin for some input from u guys if that is a worthwhile move but I heard Form 4 had even more molec bio than Form 3 which is ridiculous to begin with
Suggestions.....?
In my experience NBME's are the best predictors out there
But "best" and "good" aren't always the same thing. And how good a predictor you think it is is going to be tainted by how well it predicted your score (as opposed to those of all takers).
Are you guys talking about the clinical sciences section or the basic sciences forms?
I seem to be seeing both and not sure which most people are talking about.
I'm gonna have to disagree. Even though several questions do come verbatim from the NBMEs, that is not their main advantage. Each NBME emphasizes on a different set of subjects. Therefore, by doing all 4 NBMEs one would have been tested on all topics (that are fair game in Step 1) at the same level of complexity as the real test. For example, nutrition was only tested in NBME 1 and 2 (not really in 3 and 4), but was heavily tested in my Step 1, so I am glad that I did all 4 NBMEs and found that I needed to work on nutrition.
I scored on par with the people posting on this thread (>260) and I feel the NBMEs aren't necessary. I only did one of them about halfway through my studying just to see if I could pass. After that, I wasn't going to waste 3 more days doing more NBME tests that I couldn't review. The way I viewed it was if I did worse on a test it would screw up my confidence but if i did what I was expecting it wouldn't change anything at all (except that I wasted half a day doing a test I couldn't review). Not everyone gets 3+ months to study for this test, choose what you do on each day wisely.
Same goes for those 150qs - never touched them.
I agree with blz. Being able to review your mistakes is valuable, and something many medical students forget about and do not do adequately. I reviewed ALL of my mistakes for ALL of my tests during 2nd year, and the things I got wrong really stuck in my head when boards time came.
Eh, you probably could have figured out that you needed to work on nutrition for less than the $180 it cost you to take all 4 NBMEs.
Being able to review your mistakes is valuable, and something many medical students forget about and do not do adequately. I reviewed ALL of my mistakes for ALL of my tests during 2nd year, and the things I got wrong really stuck in my head when boards time came.
well, Kaplan Qbank, USMLEWorld, USMLEasy, Exam Master, Robbins Review of Pathology and BRS biochemistry all failed to adequately test me on nutrition (at least not to the level tested in the NBMEs or my Step 1 exam). Plus what is $180 when compared to gaining access to the most representative question bank in the market. I stick by my word - the NBMEs play a major role in securing a stellar Step 1 performance.
Just my opinion, but I gotta believe that many of the folks for whom it was not predictive aren't going to be posting as often. It's hard to ignore the multiple statements on the NBME site that the scores on these tests should not be used as an accurate prediction of how you will do on the real thing.
All you had to do was read the Goljan chapter on nutrition (or listen to his nutrition lecture) and you would have been money for nutrition.
It's easy for you to stand by your word since I believe you mentioned you had months to study for this test. So obv, its to your benefit to use all the resources you can. But for people who don't have months to study, the benefit of doing all the NBMEs is less so for the reasons I mentioned prior.
When do most people take the NBME exams, say during a standard 5 week study regimen?
point well taken. i just don't remember the OP (or anybody else in this thread) mentioning time as a factor. so when i give advice, i usually assume that the OP wants to achieve the highest score possible and is fighting for every last point. so i don't see how people could go about advising people not to take advantage of such an important resource (especially when they nobody mentioned time constraint as a factor). I would understand your input if you were advocating for other resources which you found immensely helpful (like your goljan), but how could you feel confident belittling a resource which youve never used?
What do you guys think is the ideal order to take the tests? Should I do #4 first to get it out of the way?
What do you guys think is the ideal order to take the tests? Should I do #4 first to get it out of the way?
I'm starting to feel that Qbank questions are a great learning tool, but are probably not stylistically acurate. Are these NBME tests more useful as predictive tools (to be used toward the end of studying), or can they be used just to get a feel for the writing style of the testmakers (at the beginning of studying)?