ITE results??

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
MTGas2B said:
Looks like test was harder or folks didn't do as well this year compared to 2007.
Click to expand...

Why do you say that?


And WTF does this keyword mean: "Neonate: duration of past anesthesia monitoring"?

I think it might have something to do with overnight admission for a former preemie ... maybe the "past" is a typo and should be "post."

Or maybe those guys sit around playing drinking games that involve making up the most cryptic word salads possible just to mess with us. (It's what I would do.)

"Spinal anesthesia cx" is nonintuitive also.
 
pgg said:
Why do you say that?


And WTF does this keyword mean: "Neonate: duration of past anesthesia monitoring"?

"Spinal anesthesia cx" is nonintuitive also.
Click to expand...

Neonate: duration of POST-Anesthesia monitoring

Spinal Anesthesia COMPLICATIONS

I think...
 
If you look at the stats sheet that comes with your score, compare it to last year's.

CA-2 Mean 2007 31
CA-2 Mean 2008 28

A score of 30 in 2007 37th percentile for CA-2s
A score of 30 in 2008 80th percentile for CA-2s
 
MTGas2B said:
If you look at the stats sheet that comes with your score, compare it to last year's.

CA-2 Mean 2007 31
CA-2 Mean 2008 28

A score of 30 in 2007 37th percentile for CA-2s
A score of 30 in 2008 80th percentile for CA-2s
Click to expand...

Oh. I didn't get a stats sheet. I'm on an out rotation so my PD emailed my score & a scan of my keywords page to me.

If that page of numbers/stats doesn't have any personal info on it, any chance you could post a scan?
 
pgg said:
Oh. I didn't get a stats sheet. I'm on an out rotation so my PD emailed my score & a scan of my keywords page to me.

If that page of numbers/stats doesn't have any personal info on it, any chance you could post a scan?
Click to expand...

I'm at work right now. I don't have a scanned version of this year's right now. I could have one by tomorrow.
 
The scores were scaled to a maximum of 41 this year instead of 50 so you can't compare 2 digits scores between years. Percentage says it all anyway.
 
student.ie said:
The scores were scaled to a maximum of 41 this year instead of 50 so you can't compare 2 digits scores between years. Percentage says it all anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm not clear on what you mean here. Are you saying that the 2-digit scores for this year's ITE were scaled differently than this year's for-credit exam? Or that last year's max ITE score was 50 and this year's max ITE score was 41 (which isn't correct)?

I don't know what they gain by utilizing nonintuitive scales that change annually. It reminds me of the way the MCAT writing sample used to be scored on a scale of "J" through "T" ...
 
anyone hear about what is considering "passing" ?

I know back in the day if you had a scaled score above 34 or something it meant you would pass. This year?
Thanks
 
ite.jpg
 
Thanks Bertelman. Couple things to ask/add -

I got another email from my PD a couple hours ago. Apparently the ABA screwed up the norm table, despite having 3 months to construct it, and the initial scores were reported with incorrect percentiles. A revised norm table has been sent out. Is this the original or the revised?

What's with the 67 CA-3s that took the ITE this year? Are they people who are graduating late and won't be eligible for the exam until next year (which also might explain why they didn't do much better than the CA-2s)?

Student.ie - the max score isn't 41 - it's just that everyone above that was in the 99th. And I don't think percentile means everything - the exam doesn't have a fixed pass/fail % (at the nadir, even 50th %ile was failing in 2000) so if the for-credit exam was comparable to the ITE, it could be that they just failed more people this year.

SleepIsGood - what I've been told is that each year 33 is usually passing, and 34 is "definitely" passing. I don't know how definite that ever was though. When the for-credit and ITE exams were taken in the same room, different questions were scored and reported for each, so I don't think the scores were ever 100% directly comparable.

Thanks again Bertelman.
 
That must be the new table. I was told my exam score and %tile a week or so ago. Then my PD mentioned that the original %tile was wrong ... according to the table posted here, my %tile is about 10% lower than what I was originally told.

About the CA3's, I saw a new grad at the ITE from another institution, so at his program, he must've had the option.
 
I can't quote you a reliable source or anything, but I was told that a lot of the 'CA-3s' are people who are long finished. Board Eligibility only lasts for so many years, then graduates have to take the in training exam to become board eligible again, or something like that. My impression is that these people are grouped as CA-3s whether they finished 6 years or 30 years ago. Which explains why their numbers are worse than CA-2s.
 
pgg said:
I'm not clear on what you mean here. Are you saying that the 2-digit scores for this year's ITE were scaled differently than this year's for-credit exam? Or that last year's max ITE score was 50 and this year's max ITE score was 41 (which isn't correct)?

I don't know what they gain by utilizing nonintuitive scales that change annually. It reminds me of the way the MCAT writing sample used to be scored on a scale of "J" through "T" ...
Click to expand...

Yeah that's true, the max score is 60 this year and I guess last year too though I didn't check- can't find last years report. It is hard to explain why the scores are different between this year and last year since they are 'scaled scores'. They were obviously scaled differently, but I can't imagine how anyone would find an advantage to shifting the scale downward this year. Pointless creation of confusion? It reminds me of Fight Club - operation mayhem.
 
Question here. For those of us who are current CA1's, and took the exam this past July, when determining the percentile ranks, do we look at the CB or CA1 column? Thanks.
 
Is it just me or is the ABA ******ed &/or inconsiderate?
My score this year was one point higher than last year due to the meaningless change in scaling of the scores. I looked at my percentile from this year on last years norm table, and it was 4 points higher. In other words, if the scaling had been left alone I would have gone up 5 points instead of just 1. The reason this bothers me is that I think my one point improvement will look pretty lousy on fellowship applications (even though the percentiles are both good). I mean the programs don't ask for your percentile, just your 2 digit score. Fellowship programs may be aware of this and all the other applicants are in the same boat, but why change? why?
or maybe I'm over-analyzing. I do that.
 
student.ie said:
Is it just me or is the ABA ******ed &/or inconsiderate?
My score this year was one point higher than last year due to the meaningless change in scaling of the scores. I looked at my percentile from this year on last years norm table, and it was 4 points higher. In other words, if the scaling had been left alone I would have gone up 5 points instead of just 1. The reason this bothers me is that I think my one point improvement will look pretty lousy on fellowship applications (even though the percentiles are both good). I mean the programs don't ask for your percentile, just your 2 digit score. Fellowship programs may be aware of this and all the other applicants are in the same boat, but why change? why?
or maybe I'm over-analyzing. I do that.
Click to expand...

I thought fellowship programs weren't allowed to ask about in-service results. Am I wrong?
 
rsgillmd said:
I thought fellowship programs weren't allowed to ask about in-service results. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Yes. I have applications in hand with space for your results. I'm happy about it really, just wish the scale hadn't been changed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Critical care exam results posted
Replies
0
Views
812
ToKingdomCome
T
S
ITE "keywords" that I can't interpret. AI also can't interpret. How am I supposed to learn from this?
Replies
5
Views
838
ToKingdomCome
T
K
Struggling with ITE
Replies
15
Views
6K
AKMD_1984
A
P
Week before ITE
Replies
2
Views
782
TeslaCoil
TeslaCoil
j4pac
Oral board results???
Replies
6
Views
3K
DesiredMemberName?
DesiredMemberName?
Top