Jan 16, 2014
97
203
New York, New York
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I've come across a ton of outdated and seemingly opinion-based articles about the correlation between UWorld averages and Step 1 scores, which I feel are useless without sources backing where these stats came from. I'm interested in compiling some data on this; I think it could be helpful for everyone to track their progress and get an idea of where they stand. I'll publish the results on here once I have a solid sample size. If you've taken Step 1 already and received your score, and went through a significant portion of UWorld for prep, please answer the survey below (completely anonymous) with your UWorld average and Step 1 score. Thanks!

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/W8QPJW7
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Jan 16, 2014
97
203
New York, New York
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
The purpose of this is to gather data and consolidate it in one place that attempts to find a correlation between UWorld and Step 1 scores. I can look at individual scores and experiences, and that's great for getting advice, providing hope, etc. But I think it would be helpful to look at trends. xx% on UWorld correlated to a score of xxx, with the range of scores from (xxx) to (xxx).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
About the Ads

PL198

5+ Year Member
Apr 25, 2014
4,509
4,127
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
who cares, information isn't comparable anyway. people use uworld different. some people do questions over. others don't.

some people drive right in and learn from questions and mistakes , other people study a book first and then treat uworld like a test
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Jan 16, 2014
97
203
New York, New York
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I'm sure that there will be biased results, but so far I've gotten 8 or 9 responses and there's a pretty nice correlation between them. I'm hoping that some lower scorers will be willing to post their scores to really even out the distribution. Unfortunately, there will be high-scorer selection bias, but I've gotten a few more "average" scorers to respond as well, and those in the middle seem to fit the line between the highest and the lowest. I'm not looking to publish these results in JAMA, but I do hope to be able to give people an idea regarding what their scores might vaguely translate to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
About the Ads

W19

Membership Revoked
Removed
2+ Year Member
Sep 24, 2014
6,005
4,347
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
39% on Kaplan Qbank corresponds to 197... This definitely put my 59% :( on Kaplan into perspective.
 

Rekt

5+ Year Member
May 29, 2015
2,040
4,849
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
I'm an MS1. Can someone explain what % of UWorld means? I know it's comprised of blocks, but is it you treating it like an exam and that's your score?
 

pre med 2014

5+ Year Member
Jan 2, 2012
2,057
206
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I'm an MS1. Can someone explain what % of UWorld means? I know it's comprised of blocks, but is it you treating it like an exam and that's your score?

As you go along the question bank your total percent correct is continuously updated. Since most people finish the entire question bank before the exam at least once it can sort of predict performance




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

pre med 2014

5+ Year Member
Jan 2, 2012
2,057
206
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Does 60% right on uworld get you close to 230 on step 1?

Probably not. I'm at 52% at about 700q's into 2nd pass and still have yet to pass an NBME (last NBME was 164 taken immediately after 40% 1st pass). If 60% was a 230 then I wouldn't feel like I was in such a precarious position at the moment


I'll also add that I'm off the questions for now and reviewing core material so hopefully I'll be around 60% when I get back to it after finishing a megablock of new material/stuff I'm weak on

Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

mymembernames

10+ Year Member
Feb 23, 2009
809
216
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I though we were supposed to use it as a learning tool and not focus on the percent and use NBMEs for that?
 

Psai

This space for lease
Removed
5+ Year Member
Jan 2, 2014
11,385
23,984
ヽ(´ー`)ノ
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
I though we were supposed to use it as a learning tool and not focus on the percent and use NBMEs for that?

Yes but you can't help wondering what the percentages mean and how you will do. I spent the first two weeks obsessing about my percentage which in hindsight was pretty silly
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

chillaxbro

7+ Year Member
Jun 11, 2012
1,502
1,030
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-health Advisor
Wow %60 = 230? I'm a week into my dedicated study period and havent even looked at half of first aid and I'm getting %60 on all my uworld blocks. I should just move the exam to ASAP and take the next 5 weeks off :flame:
 

Stagg737

7+ Year Member
Jul 2, 2013
8,671
11,096
Decapod 10
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Wow %60 = 230? I'm a week into my dedicated study period and havent even looked at half of first aid and I'm getting %60 on all my uworld blocks. I should just move the exam to ASAP and take the next 5 weeks off :flame:

Lol, I'm the same way with Kaplan. My 62% halfway through without any solid review is making me pretty happy right now. I think I need to bomb some questions to bring my confidence back down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

gregoryhouse

Head of the Department of Diagnostic Medicine
7+ Year Member
Nov 6, 2013
336
268
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Mine correlate way closer with the NBMEs but my score wasn't too far off the ohter link that was posted
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
About the Ads

omn

7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2009
241
13
52
You're gonna get some awfully biased data with this..

what does this mean? Is this even English.. do you mean skew, or long left or right tails...? so.. for myself.. massively uncorrelated.. 1.75 x through UWorld, so last two weeks, random blocks, fast and always above 70% ... Step 1 was 202 ... no one I know, knows why this happened
 
Last edited:

ForHumors

7+ Year Member
Jul 8, 2013
95
87
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Hate to be that guy, but you can't say "for me, it was uncorrelated". Correlation works on a group level, not an individual level. Instead, say that "UWorld did not predict my score well"

I'm being a dbag I know, but I'll justify it by saying that using stats terms right makes us look smarter to other professions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

ForHumors

7+ Year Member
Jul 8, 2013
95
87
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
The purpose of this is to gather data and consolidate it in one place that attempts to find a correlation between UWorld and Step 1 scores. I can look at individual scores and experiences, and that's great for getting advice, providing hope, etc. But I think it would be helpful to look at trends. xx% on UWorld correlated to a score of xxx, with the range of scores from (xxx) to (xxx).

I think what @alpinism meant was that you can use old forums to mine data for your correlation.
 
Jan 3, 2013
412
622
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
what does this mean? Is this even English.. do you mean skew, or long left or right tails...? so.. for myself.. massively uncorrelated.. 1.75 x through UWorld, so last two weeks, random blocks, fast and always above 70% ... Step 1 was 202 ... no one I know, knows why this happened

Wait,you were going through UWorld a SECOND time and was only getting >70%? I'm pretty sure that correlation chart linked to above was meant for the first attempt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

sliceofbread136

7+ Year Member
Nov 5, 2011
4,972
2,951
what does this mean? Is this even English.. do you mean skew, or long left or right tails...? so.. for myself.. massively uncorrelated.. 1.75 x through UWorld, so last two weeks, random blocks, fast and always above 70% ... Step 1 was 202 ... no one I know, knows why this happened

I don't see anything wrong with the English I used? You might want to look at your own grammar before calling out others...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

midwestm2

2+ Year Member
Nov 6, 2015
64
36
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
who cares, information isn't comparable anyway. people use uworld different. some people do questions over. others don't.

some people drive right in and learn from questions and mistakes , other people study a book first and then treat uworld like a test

100% yes. I'm a second year in the midst of it and some of my classmates only go through Uworld questions that have been taught in class, whereas others are going through the entire question bank, including things that haven't been lectured on yet
 

omn

7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2009
241
13
52
Wait,you were going through UWorld a SECOND time and was only getting >70%? I'm pretty sure that correlation chart linked to above was meant for the first attempt.
It was a year later and alot of times those were 90%+ (if for some reason you need an accurate bottom).

I WILL ADD THAT, as has been stated here on UWorld ad nauseum, after one's initial pass on UWorld, one tends to just remember the answer (sometimes even spatially; i.e., knowing it's location in the answer choices) rather than the second pass really being a further "drill down" on the topic.. (which of course is what you want).

I think there IS, let's call it, a vignette skill (grasping) that you have to develop; and it's harder to stay fascinated when you are older.. I recommend mneumonics for the, (allow me) "memorizie" (an adjective) stuff.. I wasn't very adept at using mneumonics, no good exposure to that, and feel that group study can help on that point... but alas, I didn't have that.

Sent from my SM-N900V using SDN mobile
 

omn

7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2009
241
13
52
Hate to be that guy, but you can't say "for me, it was uncorrelated". Correlation works on a group level, not an individual level. Instead, say that "UWorld did not predict my score well"

I'm being a dbag I know, but I'll justify it by saying that using stats terms right makes us look smarter to other professions.
Eh, I disagree, uncorrelated isn't NOT used more colloquially to refer to a connection between two individual parameters (as my use was here in this passage). It's not like skew or tails (about defending the semantic hardiness of statistical terms!!). Face it, even the term "normal distribution" is slightly abhorrent, not to speak of what the other statistical terms are going on about...................................

Sent from my SM-N900V using SDN mobile
 
About the Ads

omn

7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2009
241
13
52
and just for reference, my MCAT verbal score (my worst) was less than 2/3 of my Physical Sciences score.... and my essay score was below average
 
D

dempty

Eh, I disagree, uncorrelated isn't NOT used more colloquially to refer to a connection between two individual parameters (as my use was here in this passage). It's not like skew or tails (about defending the semantic hardiness of statistical terms!!). Face it, even the term "normal distribution" is slightly abhorrent, not to speak of what the other statistical terms are going on about...................................

Sent from my SM-N900V using SDN mobile
Respectfully, you can disagree, and note what the general public mean when they use a term, but that doesn't mean it's correct. I think he was pointing out the actual meaning and application of correlation in this context (to clarify for anyone who might not know the difference because of the colloquial use). Certainly, you could say your STEP1 score was poorly/highly correlated with your UWorld % correct if you took STEP 1 multiple times and had used UWorld each time as well (then, you'd be able to see the correlation of the two variables).

In terms of biased sample data-- I think what was meant by the comment was that you're asking for data from a source that isn't likely to be representative of the population of interest (one kind of bias). So, he or she wasn't incorrect by stating you're likely to get biased data... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

omn

7+ Year Member
Nov 24, 2009
241
13
52
Respectfully, you can disagree, and note what the general public mean when they use a term, but that doesn't mean it's correct. I think he was pointing out the actual meaning and application of correlation in this context (to clarify for anyone who might not know the difference because of the colloquial use). Certainly, you could say your STEP1 score was poorly/highly correlated with your UWorld % correct if you took STEP 1 multiple times and had used UWorld each time as well (then, you'd be able to see the correlation of the two variables).

In terms of biased sample data-- I think what was meant by the comment was that you're asking for data from a source that isn't likely to be representative of the population of interest (one kind of bias). So, he or she wasn't incorrect by stating you're likely to get biased data... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias
The word "correlate" is used far more frequently in ordinary language to discuss two single instances, rather than grouped data as would be one way of finding it in statistics

So, in fact, you are trying to correct me incorrectly and I am powerfully aware that you haven't provided any basis for your implied authority. I don't think you understand word usage correctly, or appreciate that "word use" is one of the principal means of arriving at correct definitions.. and again unclear what your purpose is here of trying to correct me incorrectly, but the means and manner is somewhat revolting.

Sent from my SM-N900V using SDN mobile
 
D

dempty

The word "correlate" is used far more frequently in ordinary language to discuss two single instances, rather than grouped data as would be one way of finding it in statistics

So, in fact, you are trying to correct me incorrectly
I wasn't trying to correct you-- I was pointing out what I thought the other poster intended by his explanation. I was saying that he isn't wrong (neither are you right) just because common usage has a different meaning than this thread (and I said in this context, the OP's context, the statistical meaning is more correct). It's interesting though, that you're trying to argue a point that is counter to the stated intent of this thread (to gather data to estimate a relationship between two variables). Reread the first post. It should be apparent that the OP is, very likely, looking for a correlation between the two variables.

and I am powerfully aware that you haven't provided any basis for your implied authority.
I'm not sure where you found that I was implying authority. I'm sorry if that bothered you. I provided a link to Wikipedia, so you could investigate terminology if you found my explanation to be suspect. It's also curious that you request someone (on an internet message board) supply you with information regarding their authority to post on a topic when it doesn't seem you've provided any evidence of your own authority (but, I couldn't care less about that. This is the internet...).

I don't think you understand word usage correctly, or appreciate that "word use" is one of the principal means of arriving at correct definitions.. and again unclear what your purpose is here of trying to correct me incorrectly, but the means and manner is somewhat revolting.

Sent from my SM-N900V using SDN mobile
I appreciate your concern for my grasp on the topic, and I definitely think there might be a misunderstanding here. I acknowledge that one way of arriving at the definition of a word is its common usage, but we should also consider the circumstance in which the word is used. Again, I'm sorry you're highly offended by someone disagreeing with you, but if you reconsider the context of this thread (OP), it should be more clear to you the intended meaning of correlation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jan 16, 2014
97
203
New York, New York
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Sorry to interrupt the fight going on, just took UWSA1 and got a 232, meanwhile, my block scores have been between 70-75%, consistently. I've heard that UWSA over-predicts - how should I be approaching this?
 

skarabrae

5+ Year Member
Oct 17, 2015
26
35
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Sorry to interrupt the fight going on, just took UWSA1 and got a 232, meanwhile, my block scores have been between 70-75%, consistently. I've heard that UWSA over-predicts - how should I be approaching this?

Fairly certain Uworld readjusted their curve on practice tests to be more reflective. Compare your % correct v predicted score to those of people last year and you'll see there is a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jan 16, 2014
97
203
New York, New York
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Fairly certain Uworld readjusted their curve on practice tests to be more reflective. Compare your % correct v predicted score to those of people last year and you'll see there is a difference.
I'm really hoping that that's true. A 232 a few weeks out doesn't sound like a bad place to be - whereas a possible 220 doesn't sound great.
 

PhillyMed777

7+ Year Member
Oct 24, 2013
926
1,678
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Fairly certain Uworld readjusted their curve on practice tests to be more reflective. Compare your % correct v predicted score to those of people last year and you'll see there is a difference.
This is very funny you mention this. I took them and thought the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Elevencents

5+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Sep 3, 2011
1,460
628
Status (Visible)
I never understood the reasoning for obsessing over predictions. You should be working as hard as you can regardless if your "predicted" score is a 230 vs a 240. Are you suddenly going to start working harder if it's not where you want it to be? It's only important IMO for those who are borderline passing and may need to consider postponing. Otherwise you should simply be exposing your weak areas and shoring those up. But that's just me.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Psai

This space for lease
Removed
5+ Year Member
Jan 2, 2014
11,385
23,984
ヽ(´ー`)ノ
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
I never understood the reasoning for obsessing over predictions. You should be working as hard as you can regardless if your "predicted" score is a 230 vs a 240. Are you suddenly going to start working harder if it's not where you want it to be? It's only important IMO for those who are borderline passing and may need to consider postponing. Otherwise you should simply be exposing your weak areas and shoring those up. But that's just me.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

Because you want to get a sense of where you are at and which areas you need to work on
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

W19

Membership Revoked
Removed
2+ Year Member
Sep 24, 2014
6,005
4,347
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Hate to be that guy, but you can't say "for me, it was uncorrelated". Correlation works on a group level, not an individual level. Instead, say that "UWorld did not predict my score well"

I'm being a dbag I know, but I'll justify it by saying that using stats terms right makes us look smarter to other professions.
Seriously!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tvelocity514

7+ Year Member
Mar 14, 2011
357
144
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Fairly certain Uworld readjusted their curve on practice tests to be more reflective. Compare your % correct v predicted score to those of people last year and you'll see there is a difference.

Can you share the link showing they changed it please?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 

skarabrae

5+ Year Member
Oct 17, 2015
26
35
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Can you share the link showing they changed it please?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

No link. Just compared mine and classmates % corrects/predicted scores to those last year. For example, a 79.5% on UWorld 1 now estimates a score of 252, while a 76.5% on Uworld 1 last year estimated a score of 254.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

cyanide12345678

7+ Year Member
Jul 27, 2011
1,296
966
Texas
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
In my personal n=1 opinion uworld self assessment and uworld itself has a pretty damn good correlation. I think I had around 74 % (something like that). Ended up with a 245. Uworld self assessment put me at 250 for step 1. Had roughly a 85% on uworld for step 2 and got a 267 on the real deal. Scored 265 on the uworld self assessment for step 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

mymembernames

10+ Year Member
Feb 23, 2009
809
216
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
In my personal n=1 opinion uworld self assessment and uworld itself has a pretty damn good correlation. I think I had around 74 % (something like that). Ended up with a 245. Uworld self assessment put me at 250 for step 1. Had roughly a 85% on uworld for step 2 and got a 267 on the real deal. Scored 265 on the uworld self assessment for step 2.

Was this all on your first pass through it?
 
About the Ads
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.