I have just completed my second year at a london medical school (university college london) and now starting my intercalated BSc. i was just wondering what other people who taken step 1 think i should be expected to score in the usmle, im planning to take the step next summer, with about 4months of study. i got a distinction for my first two years at medical school (that puts in the 94th centile). also to any british grads how much more difficult/different is the usmle content compared to the british?
how well should i do?
- Thread starter pm1986
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2005
- Messages
- 8,630
- Reaction score
- 726
No one can predict how you will do. As for the mean and standard deviation, I'd quote them if my score report were right next to me but it's not. All this information can easily be found on www.nbme.org as well!
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,004
- Reaction score
- 85
As well as you can since you'll be an IMG. Try to get at least 250.
what are the reputations of uk medical medical schools like in the US, e.g the top ones like oxbridge, imperial and ucl. would employers be aware of them and what schools would you compare them to in the US.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2004
- Messages
- 30,872
- Reaction score
- 10,062
I think the average for US allo is somewhere around the 215 range (with a SD of about 20). No idea how folks from the UK tend to do, but 4 months of studying is more than twice what most US folks get to work with. When you get deeper into studying and take the NBME practice tests, you can start to gauge how you might fare. Until that point no one can advise you -- there are people who have done well in med school and tanked and folks who did modestly in med school who rose to the occaision. This isn't about playing the odds -- it's about cementing in the material.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 3,435
- Reaction score
- 11
As I understand it, the british equivalent is considerably more clinical based (since most british medical schools begin clerkships during their first year of training) whereas the american version (at least Step I) is much more fact based. You may be somewhat surprised at the level of detail that the USMLE will require.
I would suggest formally preparing for the USMLE sooner rather than later. Special emphasis on pathology and microbiology. Also, make sure to address non-clinical topics that are frequently tested such as research techniques, molecular biology and biochemistry. Buy First Aid USMLE Step 1 and read through it whenever you get the chance. Everything in that text is high yield for boards.
You could also try taking a practice NBME exam to see how you would likely do on the real thing.
can any give me book recommendations?
i no there are other threads about this, but the title are abbreviated, so i difficult to tell what book it is. do most people study straight from the books or notes from uni? are usmle specific books for different topics like pathology etc?
i no there are other threads about this, but the title are abbreviated, so i difficult to tell what book it is. do most people study straight from the books or notes from uni? are usmle specific books for different topics like pathology etc?
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,958
- Reaction score
- 10
There are threads that have all this info if you do a bit of searching but some classics are:
First Aid for the USMLE: Know this book cold.
Rapid Review of Pathology, by Goljan: Thick, but lots of corrleates
BRS (Boards Review Series) Pathology: Less in depth, faster read.
Clinical Micro Made Ridiculously Simple: Good book covering microbio and antibiotics to the depth that would be anticipated on teh boards.
BRS Physiology: Quick hits on basic physiology.
For Pharmacology, I used the short Katzung book, not sure what the "suggested" book is though. Also, not sure what everyone else used for Biochem.
A lot of people will hit up specific subjects that are less common on boards but still very important like anatomy, histology, embryology, behavioral science etc. by reading either the BRS or "High Yield" version of the book.
A lot of people supplment their studying by purchasing the rights to a Question Database like Kaplans Qbank or USMLEWorld's question database. They also purchase practice tests from the NBME to test their skills.
Good luck to ya, bro. You seem like you're a smart guy, so that'll help. But second year medical students here have had two years of teachers and upper level studetns telling them what kind of material shows up on the boards (sometimes correct, sometimes not) so they have a bit of a leg up on what material to study.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Messages
- 838
- Reaction score
- 1
Coming from the UK, your path and pharm will be fine. Your micro isn't the same as the US students so you need to review American micro books. Biochem and behavioural science is COMPLETELY different so spend a lot of time on those subjects. But mostly just review US review books (First aid, BRS stuff, etc) and be familiar with the stuff they ask.
For this year, the mean is 218 and a pass is 184. Anything over 237 was a 99 on the 2 digit scale (75 was a pass and 99 was the top). I don't think anyone knows the real standard deviation but I think most people believe it's between 15 and 20 points.
I got a 245/99 coming from Ireland but I use American textbooks for all of medical school. Most of my classmates and friends (in both Ireland and the UK) got between 190-210. Only a small handfull beat the US mean of 218. It is a real accomplishment beating the US mean coming from a different system. Even some of the brightest, hard workers I know didn't beat the mean after 3 months of so of studying. It's not because they're not smart, it's just that micro and biochem killed them especially. Behavioural science is easy to learn quickly but there's no replacing the years of biochem the US students are taught. It's a very broad subject and a lot of my biochem questions were even testing things I studied during pre-med in Canada. Micro isn't hard, it's just people don't realize they need to study it more. The US questions test knowledge on lab tests and culture media and stuff like that a little more heavily. I know it's taught over here but not to the same degree and some UK/Irish test takers might not realize that in advance.
Good luck!
For this year, the mean is 218 and a pass is 184. Anything over 237 was a 99 on the 2 digit scale (75 was a pass and 99 was the top). I don't think anyone knows the real standard deviation but I think most people believe it's between 15 and 20 points.
I got a 245/99 coming from Ireland but I use American textbooks for all of medical school. Most of my classmates and friends (in both Ireland and the UK) got between 190-210. Only a small handfull beat the US mean of 218. It is a real accomplishment beating the US mean coming from a different system. Even some of the brightest, hard workers I know didn't beat the mean after 3 months of so of studying. It's not because they're not smart, it's just that micro and biochem killed them especially. Behavioural science is easy to learn quickly but there's no replacing the years of biochem the US students are taught. It's a very broad subject and a lot of my biochem questions were even testing things I studied during pre-med in Canada. Micro isn't hard, it's just people don't realize they need to study it more. The US questions test knowledge on lab tests and culture media and stuff like that a little more heavily. I know it's taught over here but not to the same degree and some UK/Irish test takers might not realize that in advance.
Good luck!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,279
- Reaction score
- 7
quick thread hijack here... you mentioned that for this year 237+ corresponded to a 99. Are there published numbers somewhere for that, or is that going off of a sample of people you know who took the test?
Just curious. I know a few people who have told others their two digit score, and of course I'm nosy and want to know where that falls in the three digit range. What you just stated would correlate the two somewhat differently than the older numbers I've seen published (in places like FA for example). I think there 99 is closer to 250 or so.
Just curious. I know a few people who have told others their two digit score, and of course I'm nosy and want to know where that falls in the three digit range. What you just stated would correlate the two somewhat differently than the older numbers I've seen published (in places like FA for example). I think there 99 is closer to 250 or so.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2003
- Messages
- 1,647
- Reaction score
- 94
It's really a numbers game out here. You must do well on the USMLE because (barring political connections or a significant eye-catcher on your CV such as publications or a Ph.D.) foreign medical graduates are only considered after U.S. graduates for residency positions. The USMLE is not impossible, and I would strongly advise you to go through as many questions as possible after your initial review of the material. The testing style used in the U.S. is really hammered into medical students before taking the USMLE, but it's very different from the way subject matter is presented and tested in the U.K. Bottom line, however: the human body is the human body and if you know your stuff, it does not matter where you come from. Good luck.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,958
- Reaction score
- 10
Just want to make sure you know, the two digit is NOT a percentile. It's just a different way of writing your score. And yes, some people got 237/99. The NBME doesn't publish your percentile score (hasn't for a few years). People have estimated based on the average and SD, but according to some people in the know the distribution is far from normal, so it's hard to guess.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 3,435
- Reaction score
- 11
I got a 235/98. I've seen at least one person with a 236/99, so I'm assuming 236 was the 99 cutoff for the June/July/August '07 testing period.
Someone in another thread mentioned that a 244 was a 98 in one of the testing periods of 2006. So it does fluctuate.
I think this might be why so many residencies are mostly concerned with the two digit score. The USMLE will open the door to the interview, but won't guarantee anything (i.e. come across as a complete jerk and even the best USMLE score won't get you ranked by that program).
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,279
- Reaction score
- 7
Thanks guys. I knew the 2 digit wasn't a percentile, and that the edges of the ranges might overlap (if not for one testing session, then at least over time) - i.e., one person might have a 240/99 and another a 241/98. But I thought the 98/99 line usually hovered much closer to 250, not 235-240, so I was curious.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 3,435
- Reaction score
- 11
Nothing. Its just that the boards in europe (I'm basing all of this from anecdotal evidence of other british grads) may only require you to know the name of an enzyme deficiency and its clinical presentation.
Over here, you could get tested on the enzyme's specific actions (substrate and product), important cofactors... and then specifics on appropriate diagnostic lab procedures and the rationale (on a molecular level) for using them.
For example: I had a question on my exam asking me to identify where in a bacterial gene a particular restriction endonuclease would make its initial cut and what the subsequent rehybridized sequence would look like.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,934
- Reaction score
- 983
apparently in london they don't have a "search" function, the ability to read entire threads, or the ability to visit USMLE's website to answer your questions
