How to Actually Prepare for APMLE Part 1

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

bobtheweazel

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Messages
1,253
Reaction score
1,523
There is a lot less mystery surrounding the American Podiatric Medical Licensing Exam (APMLE) part 1 than upperclassmen and your classmates might have you believe. If you know what the exam is and how to properly prepare for it then you should find the majority of the questions quite easy and leave your testing center with high confidence that you passed. This post will likely be very long so I will try to break it into sections so that you can scroll through and just find the information you're looking for.

MY BACKGROUND
I am within the top 10% of my class but I assure you that the methods I used should work for any student of any rank. I only had zero idea on about 5 questions on the entire exam, had good confidence in another 20-30, and was completely confident in the remainder. You should maybe also know that I have taken two board exams written by the American Board for Certification in Orthotics, Prosthetics & Pedorthics which apparently has used some of the same statisticians as the National Board of Podiatric Medical Examiners (NBPME). I am not 100% sure how those statisticians were involved in the process of making either exam but I am sure that all three of those exams (two from ABC and one from NBPME) were similar in structure and difficulty, I prepared for them in a similar manner, and I found them similarly straightforward. Compared to those ABC exams the APMLE did not stand out to me as the terrible exam that everyone says it is. In my opinion, 99% of people dislike the exam because they didn't correctly prepare for it.

QUESTION MAKING PROCESS
The most important thing to know about the question making process is that every potential question is submitted by a professor from a podiatry school. That means that every topic being tested should be taught by at least one podiatry school (the school from which the question was submitted) but that doesn't mean that every topic being tested was taught at your podiatry school. New questions are reviewed by committees of subject matter experts and edited for clarity or for other reasons. The questions that make it through will be put on future exams as pilot questions to see how they perform statistically. NBPME does also look at how top APMLE performers do on pilot questions and take that into special consideration.

CONTENT OF THE EXAM (WHAT NBPME WANTS)
This exam is made to test the minimally competency podiatrist, not the minimally competency student, and with that in mind the examiners really do not care one bit what you've learned in school. NBPME says directly on their website that the content of the examination derives directly from the periodic practice analysis studies conducted by NBPME. It focuses on competencies necessary to protect the public. It does not derive from a study of the curricula of podiatric programs. This has implications for the types of questions that NBPME solicits from question writers, the actual makeup of your exam on test day, and how the exam is scored—which I will touch on later. Every 5 years NBPME conducts their practice analysis and updates their exam specifications (% breakdown of each major category) accordingly. NBPMEs practice analyses aren't released to the public that I'm aware of but from other practice analyses that I've seen they generally ask practitioners what kinds of tasks they perform on a daily basis, how much time they spend on these various tasks, and how important or complex each of these tasks actually is. This is good information to have if you plan on making an exam for a minimally competent podiatrist. Back to my experience with ABC, they also use their practice analyses to help write their board exams, so this idea isn't unique to podiatry. The 2018 exam that we just took had been updated with new practice analysis information to the current specifications (25% lower extremity anatomy, 13% general anatomy, 13% physiology, 13% microbiology and immunology, 13% pathology, 13% pharmacology, and 10% biochemistry). The 2023 exam should be the next one to update. The only really useful information to pull from here is (1) this exam is not a direct extension of what your school teaches you, so be prepared to teach yourself a good amount of material on your own and (2) the test specifications can help guide your studying. This second tip is less useful now than in past years since most content categories are now worth 13%, but you should still be very aware that lower extremity anatomy is worth twice as much as any other category and that biochemistry is worth the least. So for example if you have one month to study you may want to start by mastering lower extremity anatomy, the the other subjects, then biochemistry last. You may hit a subject like pharmacology that takes you longer than expected and then you run out of time and don't make it through everything you wanted to. If you're going to run out of time on a subject it should be on the subject that is tested the least.

CONTENT OF THE EXAM (WHAT NBPME GETS)
Now it's maybe useful to know what NBPME wants on their exam, but what will really help you prepare is knowing the questions that the professors are actually submitting. I believe we can make two basic assumptions about what professors will submit: (1) professors will submit questions based on topics that they teach at their school and (2) professors will submit questions that they believe are important. If you had a list of questions/topics that matched those two criteria then you would essentially have the question bank in your hands. If only such a list existed. Oh...wait...it does exist. https://www.aacpm.org/wp-content/uploads/2018-AACPM-Curricular-Guide-pdf.pdf AACPM has gone through the trouble of gathering dozens of PhDs, DPMs, MDs, DOs, and more from all nine schools, combining their curricula into one long list of topics (i.e., assumption one) and then ranking those topics on a 0-4 scale based on how important they are for us to know (i.e., assumption two). In other words, this curriculum guide is our hypothetical test bank. One of the reasons this guide was originally created and is regularly updated is to help us prepare for boards. Now I know that this guide looks daunting at first, and the few upperclassmen at my school who were aware of the guide dismissed it purely because it is a lot of information. But I promise you that this is the exact information that you want, and keep in mind that the APMLE part 1 only covers the preclinical learning objectives, which is maybe a little under 2/3 of the document. I compared the curriculum guide to the old (2005 and 2008) NBPME practice exams, which were made from actual board questions that were no longer in use. I found that approximately 75% of the old board questions were ranked 3.5 or higher on the curriculum guide and that approximately 95% of the old board questions were ranked 3.0 or higher on the curriculum guide. Hypothetically then if you only studied the topics ranked 3.5 and higher from the curriculum guide you could expect to get about a 75% if you took those old exams and if you expanded that to every topic ranked 3.0 and higher from the curriculum guide you could expect to get about a 95% if you took those old exams. This validates the idea those two assumptions I made earlier and does make a case for the curriculum guide essentially being the test bank. But it goes further. Speaking with Denise Freeman, Chair of the AACPM curriculum guide committee, I found out that it is now "highly recommended" to faculty that they use objectives ranked 3.0 or higher to write new questions—though it is not mandated that they do so. So now more recently I looked at the current online APMLE practice test hosted by Prometric and compared that to the most recent edition of the curriculum guide. This time I found that 98% of the questions on the new online practice tests (which again were actual APMLE questions used in the past) were ranked 3.0 or higher on the curriculum guide and that 75% were ranked 4.0. Comparing that to the older practice tests made of older questions, the newer practice test made of newer questions is becoming more similar to the curriculum guide. And with professors now being encouraged to actually submit questions from the curriculum guide future versions of the APMLE should only become more and more similar to future versions of the curriculum guide. So the important thing to take from all of this is that the curriculum guide should absolutely guide your studying and that it is really only necessary to study the higher ranked (i.e., higher yield) topics on the guide. For me that meant studying everything ranked 3.0+ for lower extremity anatomy, 3.5+ for most other subjects, and only 4.0 for biochemistry. Now, the curriculum guide is only a line item list of topics so you'll have to pull the information from other resources (e.g., class notes, boards study books) but at least now you should know what is important and what is not. Do not trust ANY "high yield" boards preparation books made for the USMLE to tell you what you need to know for the APMLE when you have access to a full list of exactly what you need to know.

SCORING THE EXAM
Like most licensing and certifying exams, the questions are standardized by a modified Angoff standard-setting method. That's written right in the test bulletins as well as the Audit Panel Report available on the APMLE website. So if someone is trying to explain to you the scoring of the exam, and they can't explain the modified Angoff method, then I wouldn't take their advice. The percentage that you need to pass will be unique to your exam. That allows a sort of standardization for difficulty, where someone with an easier exam will require a higher percentage to pass and someone with a more difficult exam will require a lower percentage to pass. The percentage needed to pass on your exam is scaled to a 75. That 75 is the scaled score, which is not a percentage, which is where most people get lost. On a difficult exam a scaled score of 75 might only require answering 60% correct, on an easier exam a scaled score of 75 might require answering 80% correct—now that they're using LOFT the passing percentages shouldn't be quite so drastically different between exams, I'm just trying to make a point. So let's say you have the harder exam and it's scaled so that you need 60% to get the 75 scaled score and pass. Anything from 0-59% is scaled to be 55-74. So the lowest scaled score you could possibly get is a 55, which would be 0% correct. The current bulletin reads "Failing candidates will receive a report with a failing scale score (between 55 and 74)." That's what that means. They don't say how high the scaled score goes but it really doesn't matter since its minimal competency, if you reach or exceed the cut score you simply get a "pass" result. The only reason the exam is scaled is for easy comparison between different years, since the question bank is different year to year. So how is the cut score, the percentage you need, determined? I'm going to simplify the heck out of it, but you can look up the nitty gritty details if you want. Basically, a group of podiatrists looks over each question and determines the odds that a "minimally competent" podiatrist would answer that question correctly. They'll assign each question a percentage like a hard question might be 20% and an easy one might be 80%. Now let's say you have a test with 5 questions rated 20% (hard), 40% (medium), 60% (medium), 80% (easy), and 100% (easy). You can basically average those out to get your cut score of 60%. So on this specific test, a 60% is equivalent to a scaled score of 75 which would be a passing score. Now on the actual exam each question is actually weighted the exact same. So on our imaginary test you would need 60% to pass and that could be done in a number of ways including by (1) correctly answering the two easy questions and one medium difficulty question or (2) correctly answering the one hard question and two medium difficulty questions. This is an important concept to understand when studying because no matter how many easy, medium, or hard questions a particular exam is made of, you can see that the easy and medium questions will pretty much always get you to the cut score—I keep saying easy, medium, and hard because that's a simplified way of how LOFT (the algorithm they now use to make the exam) will assign you questions, giving everybody about the same number of easy, medium, and hard questions. Hypothetically it should always be more worth your time to learn the very basic and fundamental facts of a subject before getting bogged down in the more specific and difficult details, since they've pretty much designed the exam to not expect you to answer the difficult questions correctly anyway. Also, there are about 50ish pilot questions on each exam that do not count towards the cut core and will not match the exam specifications. So if it feels like a huge part of your exam was biochemistry or histology or it seemed skewed in any other way, that is probably why. Just have faith that the questions that are graded will match the specifications that you prepared for.

RESOURCES
Just because somebody else used a resource and passed the exam does not mean it was a good resource. Most people use First Aid and most people pass, but correlation is not causation. Ask those people how many questions they got that were straight out of First Aid and their answer is generally underwhelming. I would say that there is no single good resource. You should now know what you need to study based on the curriculum guide and you will have to use multiple resources to cover that all, as no single resource will. If you learn well from videos use Sketchy—I did not use Sketchy. If First Aid works well for you, then go for it—I did not use First Aid. Whatever resource you find works for you, just keep in mind that the curriculum guide should be guiding your studying. If you read any book front to back, no matter how "high yield" that book says it is, you are wasting your time reading some things that you do not need to read. So to be honest, the resources are not very important at all, knowing what to study is. Also, I would highly recommend board vitals or any similar question bank. Definitely also go over the APMLE practice tests. You will not get a huge amount of repeats from these question banks on your actual exam (though you might get some repeats), but they do cover roughly the same breadth of material and if you're the type of person who takes longer on tests you may need to practice pacing by timing yourself on practice tests. Do not use USMLE question banks, they are more difficult than anything you will see on test day and will only discourage you.

HOW TO PREPARE

Taking all of this information together:
-Time, time, and more time. Make sure you give yourself enough time. Slowly start at the beginning of the semester, ramp it up throughout the semester, and within the month before you should eat, sleep, and breathe boards. Asking our upperclassmen who failed and then passed on the retake what the largest factor was, the answer was quite simply time.
-Let the test specifications (% breakdown) guide your overall study plan.
-Let the curriculum guide guide your detailed study plan, pulling information from the resources of your choice—I personally copy-pasted information from various resources into a long study guide, but you do you. Again, the specific resource is not super important. Many people do not like First Aid but feel like they need to use it because most other people use it. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO USE FIRST AID.
-Focus on the basics, do not get bogged down in the details. In fact, master the basics before you even look at the details. You will pass the exam based purely on the simpler questions. It is waaaay more important to just cover the full breadth of what the curriculum guide tells you to, even relatively superficially, than to study in any real detail at all. Speaking to a lot of my classmates a lot of the questions they missed they said were technically easy, they simply didn't know to review that material before hand—but you have the curriculum guide, so you will know. Also, as you're studying, don't go into any more depth than you think a minimally competent podiatrist would know. For lower extremity anatomy that might be a lot of depth, for histology of the trachea, maybe not so much.

FINAL THOUGHTS
If you know what the exam is and you know how to prepare for it you should pass without any issue. Good luck errrrbody.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 22 users
Excellent write up. Wish I would have read it before starting to study. I passed, thankfully, but was more anxious waiting for the score than I should have been? Though I put in the work, I also brushed aside the curriculum and used First Aid early on. I did the one thing people tell you not to do, shifted my study plan midway. Thankfully it worked out, but I hope everyone formulating their study schedule will start here first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Thank you so much for taking the time to write this post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm not 100% sure how the exam scoring is done, but as someone who also took the exam and passed, I second what bobtheweazel said in terms of preparation. I leaned more on the First Aid book than I probably should have, and while certain topics seemed to be covered well in that book (Micro, Path and Pharm were decent), others were not covered nearly thoroughly enough (Anatomy, Physio and Neuro in particular).

First Aid is fine as a supplemental resource, but if I were to re-study for the exam I'd consult other resources more than I did the 1st time around. I'd probably either use BRS Physio or class notes for Physio review from the beginning as well as class notes for Neuro. I ended up resorting to class notes in Gross after seeing how poorly First Aid covered it (makes sense given the USMLE is not nearly as anatomy intensive as our boards). I've heard alright things about BRS Anatomy, although I've also heard it's more in depth than we typically need. I'd probably use class notes for Biochem as well, although First Aid did a decent enough job providing a good overview given that it's not terribly highly represented on boards (enough though that I'd still prepare for it now that they upped it's % of questions).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How in depth did you go into each bullet point you researched when putting together your study guide?
I pretty much used the level of detail that our professors actually went into for that topic. So let's say I was covering myocardial infarctions, I would go find my class notes that covered myocardial infarctions and basically copy paste it into my study guide and then sort of reorganize it or edit it as necessary to fit in better with what the guide was asking. Probably 90+% of the topics in the guide were also covered in our classes so that worked for most topics. Then when I got to topics we didn't really cover I just used similar topics that we did cover as my guide for how in depth to go. For a lot of topics I also used BRS as a source and I would only go as in depth as BRS would go for a given topic, since BRS generally got good reviews from our upperclassmen.

In hindsight I probably didn't need to go as far in depth as I did though, since the majority of the boards questions are so simple. If I could go back I would probably make my study guide a little less detailed than I did so it would be easier to study. A lot of the exam is really just keywords and the most well known facts about different topics and TBH if that's all you put in your study guide you'd probably still pass the exam without much issue.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
I'm not 100% sure how the exam scoring is done, but as someone who also took the exam and passed, I second what bobtheweazel said in terms of preparation. I leaned more on the First Aid book than I probably should have, and while certain topics seemed to be covered well in that book (Micro, Path and Pharm were decent), others were not covered nearly thoroughly enough (Anatomy, Physio and Neuro in particular).

First Aid is fine as a supplemental resource, but if I were to re-study for the exam I'd consult other resources more than I did the 1st time around. I'd probably either use BRS Physio or class notes for Physio review from the beginning as well as class notes for Neuro. I ended up resorting to class notes in Gross after seeing how poorly First Aid covered it (makes sense given the USMLE is not nearly as anatomy intensive as our boards). I've heard alright things about BRS Anatomy, although I've also heard it's more in depth than we typically need. I'd probably use class notes for Biochem as well, although First Aid did a decent enough job providing a good overview given that it's not terribly highly represented on boards (enough though that I'd still prepare for it now that they upped it's % of questions).

I pretty much used the level of detail that our professors actually went into for that topic. So let's say I was covering myocardial infarctions, I would go find my class notes that covered myocardial infarctions and basically copy paste it into my study guide and then sort of reorganize it or edit it as necessary to fit in better with what the guide was asking. Probably 90+% of the topics in the guide were also covered in our classes so that worked for most topics. Then when I got to topics we didn't really cover I just used similar topics that we did cover as my guide for how in depth to go. For a lot of topics I also used BRS as a source and I would only go as in depth as BRS would go for a given topic, since BRS generally got good reviews from our upperclassmen.

In hindsight I probably didn't need to go as far in depth as I did though, since the majority of the boards questions are so simple. If I could go back I would probably make my study guide a little less detailed than I did so it would be easier to study. A lot of the exam is really just keywords and the most well known facts about different topics and TBH if that's all you put in your study guide you'd probably still pass the exam without much issue.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Would you guys recommend going over the BoardVitals Qbank twice? I have a few weeks off during the break and was wondering to start it now, take notes from each question and then re-do them during the dedicated time (next yr). Thanks!
 
Would you guys recommend going over the BoardVitals Qbank twice? I have a few weeks off during the break and was wondering to start it now, take notes from each question and then re-do them during the dedicated time (next yr). Thanks!
In total, I actually went through that question bank multiple times. But I never really gave myself enough time to read through a lot of the explanations, I only read through the explanations for the questions I had no idea about. It would've been nice to start Board Vitals sooner and read through more of the explanations. So I wouldn't discourage you from starting that now.

I'd imagine most people would tell you that it's overkill to study this far out, but then again most people walk out of that exam thinking that they failed and are stressed until scores are released, so perhaps they actually should've started sooner. In my opinion, it's a pass or fail exam and in the end you're either prepared (pass) or you're not (fail), you can't be overprepared (you can't overpass).

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I'm one of those that started the Q banks less than 2 months out of the exam. I can tell you that you will not have time to review all those explanations and retake the missed Q's while you're studying from other sources. I made it a point to get through all the lower anatomy questions and anything I felt really weak on (Pharm). I think the actual questions were easier than some of the ones Board Vitals put out. It definitely helped me though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
There is a lot less mystery surrounding the American Podiatric Medical Licensing Exam (APMLE) part 1 than upperclassmen and your classmates might have you believe. If you know what the exam is and how to properly prepare for it then you should find the majority of the questions quite easy and leave your testing center with high confidence that you passed. This post will likely be very long so I will try to break it into sections so that you can scroll through and just find the information you're looking for.

Do you happen to have your study guide still :unsure:
 
There is a lot less mystery surrounding the American Podiatric Medical Licensing Exam (APMLE) part 1 than upperclassmen and your classmates might have you believe. If you know what the exam is and how to properly prepare for it then you should find the majority of the questions quite easy and leave your testing center with high confidence that you passed. This post will likely be very long so I will try to break it into sections so that you can scroll through and just find the information you're looking for.

MY BACKGROUND
I am within the top 10% of my class but I assure you that the methods I used should work for any student of any rank. I only had zero idea on about 5 questions on the entire exam, had good confidence in another 20-30, and was completely confident in the remainder. You should maybe also know that I have taken two board exams written by the American Board for Certification in Orthotics, Prosthetics & Pedorthics which apparently has used some of the same statisticians as the National Board of Podiatric Medical Examiners (NBPME). I am not 100% sure how those statisticians were involved in the process of making either exam but I am sure that all three of those exams (two from ABC and one from NBPME) were similar in structure and difficulty, I prepared for them in a similar manner, and I found them similarly straightforward. Compared to those ABC exams the APMLE did not stand out to me as the terrible exam that everyone says it is. In my opinion, 99% of people dislike the exam because they didn't correctly prepare for it.

QUESTION MAKING PROCESS
The most important thing to know about the question making process is that every potential question is submitted by a professor from a podiatry school. That means that every topic being tested should be taught by at least one podiatry school (the school from which the question was submitted) but that doesn't mean that every topic being tested was taught at your podiatry school. New questions are reviewed by committees of subject matter experts and edited for clarity or for other reasons. The questions that make it through will be put on future exams as pilot questions to see how they perform statistically. NBPME does also look at how top APMLE performers do on pilot questions and take that into special consideration.

CONTENT OF THE EXAM (WHAT NBPME WANTS)
This exam is made to test the minimally competency podiatrist, not the minimally competency student, and with that in mind the examiners really do not care one bit what you've learned in school. NBPME says directly on their website that the content of the examination derives directly from the periodic practice analysis studies conducted by NBPME. It focuses on competencies necessary to protect the public. It does not derive from a study of the curricula of podiatric programs. This has implications for the types of questions that NBPME solicits from question writers, the actual makeup of your exam on test day, and how the exam is scored—which I will touch on later. Every 5 years NBPME conducts their practice analysis and updates their exam specifications (% breakdown of each major category) accordingly. NBPMEs practice analyses aren't released to the public that I'm aware of but from other practice analyses that I've seen they generally ask practitioners what kinds of tasks they perform on a daily basis, how much time they spend on these various tasks, and how important or complex each of these tasks actually is. This is good information to have if you plan on making an exam for a minimally competent podiatrist. Back to my experience with ABC, they also use their practice analyses to help write their board exams, so this idea isn't unique to podiatry. The 2018 exam that we just took had been updated with new practice analysis information to the current specifications (25% lower extremity anatomy, 13% general anatomy, 13% physiology, 13% microbiology and immunology, 13% pathology, 13% pharmacology, and 10% biochemistry). The 2023 exam should be the next one to update. The only really useful information to pull from here is (1) this exam is not a direct extension of what your school teaches you, so be prepared to teach yourself a good amount of material on your own and (2) the test specifications can help guide your studying. This second tip is less useful now than in past years since most content categories are now worth 13%, but you should still be very aware that lower extremity anatomy is worth twice as much as any other category and that biochemistry is worth the least. So for example if you have one month to study you may want to start by mastering lower extremity anatomy, the the other subjects, then biochemistry last. You may hit a subject like pharmacology that takes you longer than expected and then you run out of time and don't make it through everything you wanted to. If you're going to run out of time on a subject it should be on the subject that is tested the least.

CONTENT OF THE EXAM (WHAT NBPME GETS)
Now it's maybe useful to know what NBPME wants on their exam, but what will really help you prepare is knowing the questions that the professors are actually submitting. I believe we can make two basic assumptions about what professors will submit: (1) professors will submit questions based on topics that they teach at their school and (2) professors will submit questions that they believe are important. If you had a list of questions/topics that matched those two criteria then you would essentially have the question bank in your hands. If only such a list existed. Oh...wait...it does exist. https://www.aacpm.org/wp-content/uploads/2018-AACPM-Curricular-Guide-pdf.pdf AACPM has gone through the trouble of gathering dozens of PhDs, DPMs, MDs, DOs, and more from all nine schools, combining their curricula into one long list of topics (i.e., assumption one) and then ranking those topics on a 0-4 scale based on how important they are for us to know (i.e., assumption two). In other words, this curriculum guide is our hypothetical test bank. One of the reasons this guide was originally created and is regularly updated is to help us prepare for boards. Now I know that this guide looks daunting at first, and the few upperclassmen at my school who were aware of the guide dismissed it purely because it is a lot of information. But I promise you that this is the exact information that you want, and keep in mind that the APMLE part 1 only covers the preclinical learning objectives, which is maybe a little under 2/3 of the document. I compared the curriculum guide to the old (2005 and 2008) NBPME practice exams, which were made from actual board questions that were no longer in use. I found that approximately 75% of the old board questions were ranked 3.5 or higher on the curriculum guide and that approximately 95% of the old board questions were ranked 3.0 or higher on the curriculum guide. Hypothetically then if you only studied the topics ranked 3.5 and higher from the curriculum guide you could expect to get about a 75% if you took those old exams and if you expanded that to every topic ranked 3.0 and higher from the curriculum guide you could expect to get about a 95% if you took those old exams. This validates the idea those two assumptions I made earlier and does make a case for the curriculum guide essentially being the test bank. But it goes further. Speaking with Denise Freeman, Chair of the AACPM curriculum guide committee, I found out that it is now "highly recommended" to faculty that they use objectives ranked 3.0 or higher to write new questions—though it is not mandated that they do so. So now more recently I looked at the current online APMLE practice test hosted by Prometric and compared that to the most recent edition of the curriculum guide. This time I found that 98% of the questions on the new online practice tests (which again were actual APMLE questions used in the past) were ranked 3.0 or higher on the curriculum guide and that 75% were ranked 4.0. Comparing that to the older practice tests made of older questions, the newer practice test made of newer questions is becoming more similar to the curriculum guide. And with professors now being encouraged to actually submit questions from the curriculum guide future versions of the APMLE should only become more and more similar to future versions of the curriculum guide. So the important thing to take from all of this is that the curriculum guide should absolutely guide your studying and that it is really only necessary to study the higher ranked (i.e., higher yield) topics on the guide. For me that meant studying everything ranked 3.0+ for lower extremity anatomy, 3.5+ for most other subjects, and only 4.0 for biochemistry. Now, the curriculum guide is only a line item list of topics so you'll have to pull the information from other resources (e.g., class notes, boards study books) but at least now you should know what is important and what is not. Do not trust ANY "high yield" boards preparation books made for the USMLE to tell you what you need to know for the APMLE when you have access to a full list of exactly what you need to know.

SCORING THE EXAM
Like most licensing and certifying exams, the questions are standardized by a modified Angoff standard-setting method. That's written right in the test bulletins as well as the Audit Panel Report available on the APMLE website. So if someone is trying to explain to you the scoring of the exam, and they can't explain the modified Angoff method, then I wouldn't take their advice. The percentage that you need to pass will be unique to your exam. That allows a sort of standardization for difficulty, where someone with an easier exam will require a higher percentage to pass and someone with a more difficult exam will require a lower percentage to pass. The percentage needed to pass on your exam is scaled to a 75. That 75 is the scaled score, which is not a percentage, which is where most people get lost. On a difficult exam a scaled score of 75 might only require answering 60% correct, on an easier exam a scaled score of 75 might require answering 80% correct—now that they're using LOFT the passing percentages shouldn't be quite so drastically different between exams, I'm just trying to make a point. So let's say you have the harder exam and it's scaled so that you need 60% to get the 75 scaled score and pass. Anything from 0-59% is scaled to be 55-74. So the lowest scaled score you could possibly get is a 55, which would be 0% correct. The current bulletin reads "Failing candidates will receive a report with a failing scale score (between 55 and 74)." That's what that means. They don't say how high the scaled score goes but it really doesn't matter since its minimal competency, if you reach or exceed the cut score you simply get a "pass" result. The only reason the exam is scaled is for easy comparison between different years, since the question bank is different year to year. So how is the cut score, the percentage you need, determined? I'm going to simplify the heck out of it, but you can look up the nitty gritty details if you want. Basically, a group of podiatrists looks over each question and determines the odds that a "minimally competent" podiatrist would answer that question correctly. They'll assign each question a percentage like a hard question might be 20% and an easy one might be 80%. Now let's say you have a test with 5 questions rated 20% (hard), 40% (medium), 60% (medium), 80% (easy), and 100% (easy). You can basically average those out to get your cut score of 60%. So on this specific test, a 60% is equivalent to a scaled score of 75 which would be a passing score. Now on the actual exam each question is actually weighted the exact same. So on our imaginary test you would need 60% to pass and that could be done in a number of ways including by (1) correctly answering the two easy questions and one medium difficulty question or (2) correctly answering the one hard question and two medium difficulty questions. This is an important concept to understand when studying because no matter how many easy, medium, or hard questions a particular exam is made of, you can see that the easy and medium questions will pretty much always get you to the cut score—I keep saying easy, medium, and hard because that's a simplified way of how LOFT (the algorithm they now use to make the exam) will assign you questions, giving everybody about the same number of easy, medium, and hard questions. Hypothetically it should always be more worth your time to learn the very basic and fundamental facts of a subject before getting bogged down in the more specific and difficult details, since they've pretty much designed the exam to not expect you to answer the difficult questions correctly anyway. Also, there are about 50ish pilot questions on each exam that do not count towards the cut core and will not match the exam specifications. So if it feels like a huge part of your exam was biochemistry or histology or it seemed skewed in any other way, that is probably why. Just have faith that the questions that are graded will match the specifications that you prepared for.

RESOURCES
Just because somebody else used a resource and passed the exam does not mean it was a good resource. Most people use First Aid and most people pass, but correlation is not causation. Ask those people how many questions they got that were straight out of First Aid and their answer is generally underwhelming. I would say that there is no single good resource. You should now know what you need to study based on the curriculum guide and you will have to use multiple resources to cover that all, as no single resource will. If you learn well from videos use Sketchy—I did not use Sketchy. If First Aid works well for you, then go for it—I did not use First Aid. Whatever resource you find works for you, just keep in mind that the curriculum guide should be guiding your studying. If you read any book front to back, no matter how "high yield" that book says it is, you are wasting your time reading some things that you do not need to read. So to be honest, the resources are not very important at all, knowing what to study is. Also, I would highly recommend board vitals or any similar question bank. Definitely also go over the APMLE practice tests. You will not get a huge amount of repeats from these question banks on your actual exam (though you might get some repeats), but they do cover roughly the same breadth of material and if you're the type of person who takes longer on tests you may need to practice pacing by timing yourself on practice tests. Do not use USMLE question banks, they are more difficult than anything you will see on test day and will only discourage you.

HOW TO PREPARE
Taking all of this information together:
-Time, time, and more time. Make sure you give yourself enough time. Slowly start at the beginning of the semester, ramp it up throughout the semester, and within the month before you should eat, sleep, and breathe boards. Asking our upperclassmen who failed and then passed on the retake what the largest factor was, the answer was quite simply time.
-Let the test specifications (% breakdown) guide your overall study plan.
-Let the curriculum guide guide your detailed study plan, pulling information from the resources of your choice—I personally copy-pasted information from various resources into a long study guide, but you do you. Again, the specific resource is not super important. Many people do not like First Aid but feel like they need to use it because most other people use it. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO USE FIRST AID.
-Focus on the basics, do not get bogged down in the details. In fact, master the basics before you even look at the details. You will pass the exam based purely on the simpler questions. It is waaaay more important to just cover the full breadth of what the curriculum guide tells you to, even relatively superficially, than to study in any real detail at all. Speaking to a lot of my classmates a lot of the questions they missed they said were technically easy, they simply didn't know to review that material before hand—but you have the curriculum guide, so you will know. Also, as you're studying, don't go into any more depth than you think a minimally competent podiatrist would know. For lower extremity anatomy that might be a lot of depth, for histology of the trachea, maybe not so much.

FINAL THOUGHTS
If you know what the exam is and you know how to prepare for it you should pass without any issue. Good luck errrrbody.

How about for part 2 boards? Any study guide it? Pocket podiatry is good but it's 500 pages of info. Any doc that makes it easier and quicker to study the stuff quickly? Did you make anything for it? If so, can you please post it?
 
For APMLE part 2 boards, I had a question regarding Chapter 25 (Implants). What does everyone suggest for this one? There's so much. Sorry I wasn't able to find the part 2 forum
 
Do you folks recommend doing Qbanks like maybe a couple of questions a day starting in the beginning of first year to really prepare? I.e. breaking up the 900 board vitals question into 300 days doing like 3 questions per day on the topic that you're learning in class?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Do you folks recommend doing Qbanks like maybe a couple of questions a day starting in the beginning of first year to really prepare? I.e. breaking up the 900 board vitals question into 300 days doing like 3 questions per day on the topic that you're learning in class?
I just did them 3x through starting 2 months before boards. I probably did 50-100 a day when I would do them, usually just while watching TV at the end of the day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Do you folks recommend doing Qbanks like maybe a couple of questions a day starting in the beginning of first year to really prepare? I.e. breaking up the 900 board vitals question into 300 days doing like 3 questions per day on the topic that you're learning in class?

Yup, I did..about 50-60 questions per week (around the end of year 1) so was done with the qbank before dedicated time. I would do those questions on review/timed and write down a line or two about it into first aid in that particular section or a blank page (if not in first aid); I did the questions again 1 month before the exam and just reviewed my notes afterward.

It def helps to do that qbank a few times so imo you can start now; even though you won't know much at the moment..its a good practice regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I just did them 3x through starting 2 months before boards. I probably did 50-100 a day when I would do them, usually just while watching TV at the end of the day.
Yup, I did..about 50-60 questions per week (around the end of year 1) so was done with the qbank before dedicated time. I would do those questions on review/timed and write down a line or two about it into first aid in that particular section or a blank page (if not in first aid); I did the questions again 1 month before the exam and just reviewed my notes afterward.

It def helps to do that qbank a few times so imo you can start now; even though you won't know much at the moment..its a good practice regardless.

Thanks!

So my follow up to that would be, what kind of material should I use? I'm assuming First aid, Sketchy micro / pharm, BRS / class notes for LE anatomy, board vitals for Qbanks and prometric for full lengths when the time comes? Would pathoma be a overkill?
 
Thanks!

So my follow up to that would be, what kind of material should I use? I'm assuming First aid, Sketchy micro / pharm, BRS / class notes for LE anatomy, board vitals for Qbanks and prometric for full lengths when the time comes? Would pathoma be a overkill?
I did not use First Aid. I used Sketchy micro and mostly class notes for everything else. I did not study for the path section so I can’t comment on Pathoma. BV was decent as a question bank and I took all of the old and newer Prometric exams, finding the difficulty similar to the real deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks!

So my follow up to that would be, what kind of material should I use? I'm assuming First aid, Sketchy micro / pharm, BRS / class notes for LE anatomy, board vitals for Qbanks and prometric for full lengths when the time comes? Would pathoma be a overkill?

Those are all great resources for the boards and I used most of them. But for now, focus more in-class materials (its the best way to learn) and do a bunch of questions from different sources (like BRS, anatomy tv, UMichigan site, etc).

I also think Pathoma was a bit much and class ppts were enough for me along with FA stuff. Talk to students in your program ahead of you about part 1 and how they studied and follow suit during the dedicated time!

And if you didn't already, check out another thread we made about part 1 prep:

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Those are all great resources for the boards and I used most of them. But for now, focus more in-class materials (its the best way to learn) and do a bunch of questions from different sources (like BRS, anatomy tv, UMichigan site, etc).

I also think Pathoma was a bit much and class ppts were enough for me along with FA stuff. Talk to students in your program ahead of you about part 1 and how they studied and follow suit during the dedicated time!

And if you didn't already, check out another thread we made about part 1 prep:


Thanks.

I always feel a little weird about class notes because of my bad experience with undergrad and MCAT. Felt as though class material didn't really reflect the test at all and I'm afraid of making the same mistake, that's why I'm neurotic about prepping early cause I find it more manageable when I start some early and chip away at it bit by bit rather than fire hydrant style learning.
 
Thanks.

I always feel a little weird about class notes because of my bad experience with undergrad and MCAT. Felt as though class material didn't really reflect the test at all and I'm afraid of making the same mistake, that's why I'm neurotic about prepping early cause I find it more manageable when I start some early and chip away at it bit by bit rather than fire hydrant style learning.

Luckily, a few of your current professors will be writing questions for the boards, so paying attention in class will help.
If you want to double-check and make sure what you're learning in class is relevant for Part 1 then follow the guide in this post. The guide is from this year (2019) so the breakdown for each subjet may change when you take the exam but the overall topic should stay the same. IOWs, if it's in the guide, it will likely show up on the boards.
 

Attachments

  • APMLE Part I Examination Preparatory Manual.pdf
    1,002.7 KB · Views: 442
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Should we keep this thread going or need to create new one for 2020 takers?

I have a question. Is there a significant difference between current edition materials and previous editions? For example, do I have to buy BRS physiology 7th edition or 6th/5th will do the same? What about First Aid? Any significant difference between 2019/2018/2017 editions? Should I save and buy previous editions?

So, we are a little more than 3 months out. Should I hit the books hard right now, or take it slow and get hard at it 1 month or 2 months out?

Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Should we keep this thread going or need to create new one for 2020 takers?

I have a question. Is there a significant difference between current edition materials and previous editions? For example, do I have to buy BRS physiology 7th edition or 6th/5th will do the same? What about First Aid? Any significant difference between 2019/2018/2017 editions? Should I save and buy previous editions?

So, we are a little more than 3 months out. Should I hit the books hard right now, or take it slow and get hard at it 1 month or 2 months out?

Thanks

Feel free to make another thread. BRS Physio is more or less the same, so using an older edition is fine (although get the 6th if not the 7th). I would get the newest First Aid available because of the drugs, certain pics/diagrams/ and a few new disease/management are updated every year. You want to be current with Pharm/Path/physio stuff.

I will leave the hitting the book hard part for someone else to comment on, but you should start doing the board vitals questions now ( if you didn't already). I would do them 2-3x before the exam. Do the full-length exams and any other free qbank you can get your hand on. BRS questions are also good, so I would use BRS for at least Anatomy and Physio. Use Lean notes from your program and everything else should be fine from First Aid unless there is a weaker area where you may need to open a book.

Also, if something doesn't make sense in First aid, try the Boards and Beyond series...good stuff there. Also, use sketchy for micro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Thank you

Our school has LeAn 2nd year/2nd semester, meaning we just finished comprehensive exam yesterday. So it's very fresh and I did really well in it. I guess it would be ok to just review it the last. I feel less prepared with Biochem, Micro/Immun, then Physio, then Path, then Pharm.

Board Vitals have 6mos and 3mos subscriptions. I will probably just wait to buy it once I am 3mos out to pay less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thank you

Our school has LeAn 2nd year/2nd semester, meaning we just finished comprehensive exam yesterday. So it's very fresh and I did really well in it. I guess it would be ok to just review it the last. I feel less prepared with Biochem, Micro/Immun, then Physio, then Path, then Pharm.

Board Vitals have 6mos and 3mos subscriptions. I will probably just wait to buy it once I am 3mos out to pay less.

Any word on Part 1 being postponed?
 
Anyone know if this advice continues to be accurate? It seems great--even like something that should be pinned--but I want to make sure it really is reliable
 
Anyone know if this advice continues to be accurate? It seems great--even like something that should be pinned--but I want to make sure it really is reliable

Consider this most recent thread as well.
 
New questions are reviewed by committees of subject matter experts and edited for clarity
I always figured they edited the questions to increase the lack of clarity.

Source: experience
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Top