.

Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I have never heard of a case where someone was denied residency because he kept getting C's on all his courses.

However, the grades of your clinical rotation matter, but nothing before the 3rd year.
 
Especially for DOs, it's going to be your research, board scores, and who you know that really determines your fate. If you have a pretty trash class rank, but outstanding research and board scores and letters, the trash class rank will be a non-issue. If you are the top student in your class, but trash board scores and weak research, your #1 class rank means nothing.
 
I know it's common for SDN to say GPA don't matter, but at the last two lunch meetings with residency directors, both of their programs seem to harp about GPA. One even had a minimum requirement (EM residency).

I'm just going to try my best and hope for a killer board score : /.
 
popopopop said:
I know it's common for SDN to say GPA don't matter, but at the last two lunch meetings with residency directors, both of their programs seem to harp about GPA. One even had a minimum requirement (EM residency).
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty dumb. Are these AOA programs? Because a lot of MD schools are unranked and without GPA. What's going to happen when these programs are no longer AOA? Are they going to autoscreen applications from Harvard and Stanford because of no GPA?
 
  • Like
Reactions: W19
The consensus from all of the PDs in our programs (yes even the competitive specialties) is essentially don’t be at the bottom of your class. Boards rule all. The difference between all of the people in the middle of the class can literally only be one or two exam questions, decimal points in overall percentages.

I suspect a high GPA/Rank looks really good when it is coupled with a killer board score and overall good app and theoretically could give an applicant a leg up in certain fields or at certain programs when compared to other applicants
 
If you’re shooting for Derm or Ortho like every other doey-eye’d pre-boards student, then yes, it matters. Tell yourself anything you want in order to feel better, but it matters. How do PD’s not screen out Harvard/Stanford students? Easy, they look to see if they made AOA.
Class. Rank. Matters.

Anyone about to chime in saying I’m wrong. Believe whatever you want.
 
Feel free to gun for that super GPA and settle for a mediocre board score. Despite the mantra of good GPA leading to a good board score, that's not true. You will soon find out when you get hit with 40-50% average on Uworld 12 month from now, causing you to have a panic attack and take anxiety pills. I expect everyone who goes hard about GPA right now to hate life and school admin 10x in a year.
 
Spectreman said:
If you’re shooting for Derm or Ortho like every other doey-eye’d pre-boards student, then yes, it matters. Tell yourself anything you want in order to feel better, but it matters. How do PD’s not screen out Harvard/Stanford students? Easy, they look to see if they made AOA.
Class. Rank. Matters.
Anyone about to chime in saying I’m wrong. Believe whatever you want.
Click to expand...

AOA matters for Derm and Ortho. I'm not going to lie to you about that one. Finally, Harvard/Stanford students will get Derm or Ortho if they have killer board scores. Class rank doesn't matter for those students. It's a fact.

However, if you're looking to match into the a semi-competitive or competitive specialty. I would rank the following metrics in term of importance:

Step 1/Step 2 = Third year grades >> Research >>>>>>>>>>> Preclinical grades
 
popopopop said:
I know it's common for SDN to say GPA don't matter, but at the last two lunch meetings with residency directors, both of their programs seem to harp about GPA. One even had a minimum requirement (EM residency).

I'm just going to try my best and hope for a killer board score : /.
Click to expand...

You might as well cross those EM programs off your list since it's being run by a bunch of disingenuous people. Probably the same people that promise a few sdn members about automatic residency match and then not rank them.

According to Freida, which is a Residency and Fellowship Database where metrics come straight from residency programs, there're minimum cutoffs for Step 1 and Step 2. I have perused over 50 programs. I haven't encountered a single program with a preclinical gpa cutoff.

https://freida.ama-assn.org/Freida/user/search/programSearch.do

Feel free to create an account and check the data for yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Spectreman said:
If you’re shooting for Derm or Ortho like every other doey-eye’d pre-boards student, then yes, it matters. Tell yourself anything you want in order to feel better, but it matters. How do PD’s not screen out Harvard/Stanford students? Easy, they look to see if they made AOA.
Class. Rank. Matters.

Anyone about to chime in saying I’m wrong. Believe whatever you want.
Click to expand...

lol come on man, the vast majority of programs (including top ones) in any competitive specialty do not use an AOA cutoff, and that's a fact. Like I keep saying, it's only the DO forum on this site that has this kind of information.
 
Spectreman said:
If you’re shooting for Derm or Ortho like every other doey-eye’d pre-boards student, then yes, it matters. Tell yourself anything you want in order to feel better, but it matters. How do PD’s not screen out Harvard/Stanford students? Easy, they look to see if they made AOA.
Class. Rank. Matters.

Anyone about to chime in saying I’m wrong. Believe whatever you want.
Click to expand...


I agree that a stellar GPA next to a great board score is best. However I’ve talked to too many people in competitive fields who simply had the board score and an average rank to think that it will be what keeps you out of those fields.

Particularly this applies to DO students who don’t have AOA.
 
I scored 80's and 70's in most of my classes, but did well on boards and had good research experience. Got multiple interviews in a very competitive, anti DO field.

Basically, whatever you do, do well on boards.

Had a friend that scored 90%+ on his exams but didn't do well on boards. He didn't match and had to scramble. N=1, but the idea holds.
 
FistLength said:
I scored 80's and 70's in most of my classes, but did well on boards and had good research experience. Got multiple interviews in a very competitive, anti DO field.

Basically, whatever you do, do well on boards.

Had a friend that scored 90%+ on his exams but didn't do well on boards. He didn't match and had to scramble. N=1, but the idea holds.
Click to expand...

Listen to this man kids, and stop listening to fake news at your DO school. It’s not hard to find out who’s telling you the truth. All you have to do is google “ [specialty name] program director survey”.
 
license43 said:
Hey all... just wondering, how important is the gpa in medical school? Do you need above a 3.0? How does it look if one has a 2.6, 2.8...? 3.0?? Just wondering..

I know boards trump all but just want to put the gpa in perspective. Thanks.
Click to expand...


I went to medical school with 2 kids. I was in the middle of the class.
Don't fail the boards.
Don't fail any courses.
You don't have to be perfect.

Residency is a lot about board scores but it's a lot about not being a dick as a person. Nobody wants to deal with an obscene personality for 3-5 years in residency.

We had med students who rotated with us who wanted to go to residency. Many were annoying, complaining, whiny titty babies who made my life crazy and harder than it needed to be when they were there (I was chief resident who ran a very busy hospitalist rotation). Those student did not get chosen because I couldn't stand them for a month. No way to deal with them for 3 years.

Just my 2 cents.
 
ThrowAwayStepDO said:
but how were those %'s compared to your peers? if you got 70s but the averages were 60s well then that is much different than if you got 70s and the averages were 80s, ya know? (and this is another way of asking where you were class rank wise).

averages for our exams are usually low 80s and i usually score high 70s. im doing ok on uworld/ kaplan but it makes me think i am not gonna perform the best on step (i know perpetual over-thinker 🙁).
Click to expand...

His other buddy is in the 90s range unless there’s such a thing at scoring 5 STDs above the mean consistently.
 
ThrowAwayStepDO said:
but how were those %'s compared to your peers? if you got 70s but the averages were 60s well then that is much different than if you got 70s and the averages were 80s, ya know?

averages for our exams are usually low 80s and i usually score high 70s. im doing ok on uworld/ kaplan but it makes me think i am not gonna perform the best on step (i know perpetual over-thinker 🙁).
Click to expand...

According to my deans letter that conglomerates all of my pre-clinical scores, I was probably at 25-50%th percentile. Keep studying hard for the boards, try not to stray too far from the gold standard materials (UWorld, First Aid, pathoma, Sketchy) unless things have changed since I took it...
 
ThrowAwayStepDO said:
the SD on our exams is about 8 so unless your school has a SD of, what, 2? im not sure what to make of your 5 SD example, unless you actually meant "STD" 😉.

im slightly confused then. you did well in class and on boards.... so why mention your %, if it was better than most of your peers....?
Click to expand...

He’s third quartile. I’m putting you on ignore bc simple logic doesn’t register with you.
 
FistLength said:
According to my deans letter that conglomerates all of my pre-clinical scores, I was probably at 25-50%th percentile. Keep studying hard for the boards, try not to stray too far from the gold standard materials (UWorld, First Aid, pathoma, Sketchy) unless things have changed since I took it...
Click to expand...
Nope, those 4 are still pretty much the holy bible of step 1
 
Spectreman said:
If you’re shooting for Derm or Ortho like every other doey-eye’d pre-boards student, then yes, it matters. Tell yourself anything you want in order to feel better, but it matters. How do PD’s not screen out Harvard/Stanford students? Easy, they look to see if they made AOA.
Class. Rank. Matters.

Anyone about to chime in saying I’m wrong. Believe whatever you want.
Click to expand...

This is a bad comparison because the Harvard/Stanford name alone impresses PDs in derm or ortho. What you're saying applies to low tier and mid tier MD schools (where getting AOA is important and plays a major role), and even then, things like Step scores, clinical grades, research, letters etc. matter far more.
 
68PGunner said:
Feel free to gun for that super GPA and settle for a mediocre board score. Despite the mantra of good GPA leading to a good board score, that's not true. You will soon find out when you get hit with 40-50% average on Uworld 12 month from now, causing you to have a panic attack and take anxiety pills. I expect everyone who goes hard about GPA right now to hate life and school admin 10x in a year.
Click to expand...

It's likely going to be school dependent. I focused on doing well in classes. Barely touched some Rx beforehand and my starting percentages for UWorld were mid sixities. Ended up finishing it at 79% at one pass. There was a huge correlation between how well you did preclinically and how well you did on boards. There's a few outliers, but not many. I think people who say this are just lazy. Most people who do mediocre in their preclinicals will continue on to do mediocre on boards. Of course this will bring out the SDN people saying "Yeah I got straight 70s, but got a 290". How many people will come post they got all 70s and ended up with a 430?
 
Most schools are moving toward pass/fail clinical rotations as it is disingenuous to use GPA in a system where the luck of the draw can dictate your grade. Many preceptors give straight 100's and many only give A's to the very best students. Obviously an imperfect system and is why many PD's don't look at GPA. I will scrutinize the application more intensely if the gpa is below 3 but a good board score will generally trump poor grades. If I'm ranking applicants and their interviews and board scores are similar, then yes, a GPA will be a portion of what is used to differentiate final rank status.
 
Dr. Meliodas said:
Doesn't this depend on the school? I've heard of a lot of school that don't teach to the material on the Step1
Click to expand...
I have yet to see a paper that doesn't show preclinical GPA has an impact on Boards scores. Maybe those schools are publishing such data, or sharing at med education conferences.


IslandStyle808 said:
Correct, like my school...
Click to expand...
Jeeze, what are they wasting your time with???
 
Goro said:
Jeeze, what are they wasting your time with???
Click to expand...

Someone literally said this a few weeks ago, “this is important, it will be on your Step 3 boards.” .......😵

Lawper said:
Wait there are schools that teach Step 2 material before students take Step 1 and enter clinical years? 😕😕
Click to expand...

There are lots of them honestly. It’s the whole idea of “early clinical exposure” that medical schools everywhere are pitching to pre-meds. It’s a huge waste of time. If you really want to get people in the clinic sooner then condense your pre-clinical curriculum.
 
Lawper said:
Wait there are schools that teach Step 2 material before students take Step 1 and enter clinical years? 😕😕
Click to expand...

KCU is a good example of a school that teaches a lot of Step 2 material in pre-clinicals. And I mean, a lot.
 
Lawper said:
Wait there are schools that teach Step 2 material before students take Step 1 and enter clinical years? 😕😕
Click to expand...

Yep, I've found some step 2 questions online, and I was getting them more correct than step 1 for those 2-3 blocks.
 
IslandStyle808 said:
Yep, I've found some step 2 questions online, and I was getting them more correct than step 1 for those 2-3 blocks.
Click to expand...

It's sad, man. Sucks when your school's faculty as a whole has absolutely zero understanding of what Step 1 covers, and meanwhile your dean (when questioned about it) proudly replies, "we don't teach for the boards, we teach to make outstanding physicians." Seems to be a common theme across a lot of DO schools.
 
sab3156 said:
It's sad, man. Sucks when your school's faculty as a whole has absolutely zero understanding of what Step 1 covers, and meanwhile your dean (when questioned about it) proudly replies, "we don't teach for the boards, we teach to make outstanding physicians." Seems to be a common theme across a lot of DO schools.
Click to expand...
Ah the ol' 'we teach competency and make excellent clinicians that I would compare to anyone!' The goto excuse when your program fails to measure up in any objective measure.

I can't even blame the deans tho, what do you say? 'I suck at what I do and can't prepare my students for an exam they have to pass to graduate.' Not a great look.
 
Last edited:
BorntobeDO? said:
Ah the ol' 'we teach competncy and make excellent clinicians that I would compare to anyone!' The goto excuse when your program fails to measure up in any objective measure.

I can't even blame the deans tho, what do you say? 'I suck at what I do and can't prepare my students for an exam they have to pass to graduate.' Not a great look.
Click to expand...

The entire year so far has been a massive copy-paste job and regurgitation from a bunch of textbooks. No filter for cutting out irrelevant material. These professors might be OK at teaching pre-meds at an undergraduate school, but there is no place for this kind of irresponsible and ignorant behavior in a medical school setting.
 
harkas said:
that's surprising. I thought they had high comlex/step 1 score averages?
Click to expand...

I have to say they do an alright job of getting necessary stuff out. In terms of lecture... yeah they basically smash a few text books together and read us their notes on those text books. I wish they could just record all the necessary info before hand and then have lectures like Najeeb where they connect topics together instead of death by power point all the time. But I’m not a part of the powers that be. I’m also a first year so I know very little.
 
harkas said:
that's surprising. I thought they had high comlex/step 1 score averages?
Click to expand...

Step 1? We are on our own. COMLEX can't really be compared to Step 1 because there is a large amount of OMM on that worthless exam.
 
Lawper said:
Wait there are schools that teach Step 2 material before students take Step 1 and enter clinical years? 😕😕
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, our school spends 5h per week teaching us stuff like how to correctly use the antibiotic ladder during year 1. I mean it's great info for 3rd year and being a good doc in general, but no, the protocol of antibiotic ladder is not tested on step 1...and we have to re-learn it in 3rd year anyway because who remembers year 1 stuff?
 
sab3156 said:
It's sad, man. Sucks when your school's faculty as a whole has absolutely zero understanding of what Step 1 covers, and meanwhile your dean (when questioned about it) proudly replies, "we don't teach for the boards, we teach to make outstanding physicians." Seems to be a common theme across a lot of DO schools.
Click to expand...

Its what happen when you have clinicians who do their own thing with zero-clue about teaching in the pre-clinical setting. We have a couple of clinical professors who do know and have written for the COMLEX, and I can see that reflecting on my UWorld scores.

I am almost at the point of say that it should be a requirement to write for the COMLEX level 1 or heck even the USMLE step 1 in order to teach at the medical school setting.
 
jcve34 said:
I wish they could just record all the necessary info before hand and then have lectures like Najeeb where they connect topics together instead of death by power point all the time.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure they don't even know what is necessary and what isn't. Hence the textbook regurgitation.
 
jcve34 said:
I have to say they do an alright job of getting necessary stuff out. In terms of lecture... yeah they basically smash a few text books together and read us their notes on those text books. I wish they could just record all the necessary info before hand and then have lectures like Najeeb where they connect topics together instead of death by power point all the time. But I’m not a part of the powers that be. I’m also a first year so I know very little.
Click to expand...

sab3156 said:
Pretty sure they don't even know what is necessary and what isn't. Hence the textbook regurgitation.
Click to expand...

That's...messed up. Not too long ago I was super bummed they rejected me. Guess I dodged a bullet. Although I'm sure my school has problems with lectures as well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top