Ophtho average Step 1 acceptance = 242 this year....

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

PMEDStudent

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Ophtho continues to increase its average Step 1 acceptance.. and this year its at 242.


*sigh*

With Optom encroachment, I was hoping it would lose some of it's sexiness but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Members don't see this ad.
 
At least you're an AMG.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk
 
Members don't see this ad :)
PMEDStudent said:
Ophtho continues to increase its average Step 1 acceptance.. and this year its at 242.


*sigh*

With Optom encroachment, I was hoping it would lose some of it's sexiness but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Click to expand...
Please tell me you're not really a premed like your status says (I'm hoping residency neuroticism hasn't extended into the undergraduate years).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Admins - is it possible to move this to Ophtho forum? Sorry for the error!
 
considering this year the average will likely hit 230, a 240 isn't all that impressive anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yeah it's not unique to optho. Step 1 averages are increasing pretty much across the board in specialties, as is the overall Step 1 average
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Match rate for US seniors was still 91% in ophtho in 2014. That's not nearly as bad as the other surgical sub-specialties. No complaining allowed until your US senior match rate hits 80% or worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
laxplayanumba16 said:
The overall match rate is 75%. Of those that matched, 91% were US seniors. That doesn't mean 91% of all US seniors matched.

https://sfmatch.org/SpecialtyInsideAll.aspx?id=6&typ=2&name=Ophthalmology#
Click to expand...

That statistic is typically interpreted as "91% of US seniors who applied matched, 75% of all comers matched." More competitive specialties (urology, ortho, ent) have lower % US seniors matched.

91% match rate corroborated here: http://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Ophthalmology.aspx
 
KinasePro said:
That statistic is typically interpreted as "91% of US seniors who applied matched, 75% of all comers matched." More competitive specialties (urology, ortho, ent) have lower % US seniors matched.

91% match rate corroborated here: http://residency.wustl.edu/Choosing/SpecDesc/Pages/Ophthalmology.aspx
Click to expand...

I agree, that is usually the case. But notice that as far back as that data goes, the % matched of US Seniors, US Grads, and IMGs conveniently adds up to 100%. That can't be a coincidence. The only way that the data makes sense is if they are describing the percentages of those that matched that belong to each category.

I think that whoever created the WUSTL webpage must have used the same logic you did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Just matched in ophtho so I am very familiar with the stats.

Sfmatch doesn't release the match rate of US seniors. Of everyone who matched, 91% are senior years.

There was a study done in 2011 that actually had somewhat of a breakdown. Of those submitting a rank list, the overall match rate was 74% and US senior rate was 83%. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22218141)

"As is the case for other specialties, the match rate is significantly higher for US seniors compared with independent applicants (P < 0.001). Not all registrants who submit an application submit a rank list ( Table 1, available at http://aaojournal.org). We hypothesize that this occurs when applicants (1) do not receive an interview invitation and have no program to rank, (2) do not interview somewhere they like enough to rank, or (3) decide to pursue a different career path. Subsequently, the match rate for all those submitting an application is lower (61% overall; 79% and 24% for US seniors and independents, respectively) than for those submitting a rank list (74% overall; 83% and 41% for US seniors and independents, respectively). Therefore, the true match rate for those desiring a position and obtaining one is likely 61% to 74% overall and 79% to 83% and 24% to 41% for US seniors and independents, respectively. The 2011 overall match rate of 74% is similar to that of past years, which averaged 70±3% from years 2000 to 2010."

The 242 ophtho match avg this year was from a class with a national average Step 1 of 224. Usually the ophtho avg jumps 1 pt each year but this year it was 3 with maybe 1-2 jump in the national avg. Since the next class national average is 227, it'll probably jump up several points again next year. So when you are trying to aim for a certain score, find the Step 1 mean and standard deviation of that year and that'll give you an idea about the percentile you need. I think generally speaking you want to score in the top quartile nationally for your year. If you don't, you can still make up lower Step 1s with other things like a research year (or if you go to a school with a top ophtho program, you might be able to pump out tons of ophtho research without taking a year off).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
laxplayanumba16 said:
I agree, that is usually the case. But notice that as far back as that data goes, the % matched of US Seniors, US Grads, and IMGs conveniently adds up to 100%. That can't be a coincidence. The only way that the data makes sense is if they are describing the percentages of those that matched that belong to each category.

I think that whoever created the WUSTL webpage must have used the same logic you did.
Click to expand...

When other organizations like AUA and NRMP publish "US senior match %," this is generally what they mean. They usually provide US senior matched # and US senior unmatched # as well, so you could always calculate to verify. Looks like SFmatch does things differently, so I stand corrected. Keep in mind, they are the exception though.

rocketbooster said:
Sfmatch doesn't release the match rate of US seniors. Of everyone who matched, 91% are senior years.

There was a study done in 2011 that actually had the breakdown. The overall match rate was 75% and US senior rate was 81% (or maybe 83% can't remember). Considering it's getting more competitive, it's def around 80%.
Click to expand...

Thx for clarification.
 
PMEDStudent said:
Ophtho continues to increase its average Step 1 acceptance.. and this year its at 242.


*sigh*

With Optom encroachment, I was hoping it would lose some of it's sexiness but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Click to expand...

There is very little encroachment from optometry, if any. The two fields are worlds apart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
that's a high step 1 score for a resident that's going to graduate with a salary in the low 100k's and facing a terrible job market.
 
notbobtrustme said:
considering this year the average will likely hit 230, a 240 isn't all that impressive anymore.
Click to expand...

According to First Aid, the mean score for USMLE Step 1 in back in 1991 was 200. The mean score for 2013 was 228.
 
Where did you find this data? Just curious, what was radiology? EM?
 
FIREitUP said:
that's a high step 1 score for a resident that's going to graduate with a salary in the low 100k's and facing a terrible job market.
Click to expand...

Depends where you work. Starting salary is only that low if you want work in the heart of a big city, like NYC or LA. Do you think it's much different for other specialties in terms of starting salary and the job market? No. Most starting is ~$200k and doubles to ~$400k at 3-5 years. $400k is about the average. And if you do retina, you start and average much higher. If you really want more info, go search for it in the ophtho forum. This has been discussed many times.

DermViser said:
According to First Aid, the mean score for USMLE Step 1 in back in 1991 was 200. The mean score for 2013 was 228.
Click to expand...

The class that just matched took it in 2012 and the national avg was 224. The average in the 2013 class, who will be applying in a few months, is 227 according to all my friends took it that year. I remember seeing the stats provided in First Aid, and they were usually off. I don't know where they get them. Regardless, a 227 vs 228 is basically the same thing anyway. This is why I said you need to figure out the mean and standard deviation for past years to get an idea what type of percentile you need on your test. And of course, ppl always forget these are averages for getting in and as long as you are near it you'll be fine. Derms last average was 244 but tons of ppl with 230s got in. You mainly don't want to get screened out and then after that the rest of your app matters a lot more. Ppl on SDN put too much weight on Step 1 scores. If you have 250s, that'll help you a lot. But if you have a 244 vs 239, no one cares.
 
rocketbooster said:
Depends where you work. Starting salary is only that low if you want work in the heart of a big city, like NYC or LA. Do you think it's much different for other specialties in terms of starting salary and the job market? No. Most starting is ~$200k and doubles to ~$400k at 3-5 years. $400k is about the average. And if you do retina, you start and average much higher. If you really want more info, go search for it in the ophtho forum. This has been discussed many times.

The class that just matched took it in 2012 and the national avg was 224. The average in the 2013 class, who will be applying in a few months, is 227 according to all my friends took it that year. I remember seeing the stats provided in First Aid, and they were usually off. I don't know where they get them. Regardless, a 227 vs 228 is basically the same thing anyway. This is why I said you need to figure out the mean and standard deviation for past years to get an idea what type of percentile you need on your test. And of course, ppl always forget these are averages for getting in and as long as you are near it you'll be fine. Derms last average was 244 but tons of ppl with 230s got in. You mainly don't want to get screened out and then after that the rest of your app matters a lot more. Ppl on SDN put too much weight on Step 1 scores. If you have 250s, that'll help you a lot. But if you have a 244 vs 240, no one cares.
Click to expand...

Your stats are wrong. I was looking at the actual score report for the USMLE Step 1 average for 2013: http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/pdf/usmle1-13.pdf
 
Last edited:
Mad Jack said:
I've been studying for Step 1 since middle school.
Click to expand...

There was one post on SDN, where a person said he saw premed undergrads (who got into medical school) carrying First Aid with them. Realize this is MONTHS before they were to start medical school. I should be shocked, but based on how the match is going these days, it doesn't surprise me that these fears have filtered to undergrads.
 
DermViser said:
Your stats are wrong. I was looking at the actual score report for the USMLE Step 1 average for 2013: http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/pdf/usmle1-13.pdf
Click to expand...

Ah I see. Interesting. They all took their tests in June and I know their specific ones said 227 average. I guess the later administration dates pulled it up 1 point.

I know on my test it was 224 but I also took it early in the summer. I tried doing a google search to see if I could find the official 2012 average released at the end of the year but couldn't find it. Do you have 2012s? Regardless, the average for a given year will still be very close to what your own score report says.
 
rocketbooster said:
Ah I see. Interesting. They all took their tests in June and I know their specific ones said 227 average. I guess the later administration dates pulled it up 1 point.

I know on my test it was 224 but I also took it early in the summer. I tried doing a google search to see if I could find the official 2012 average released at the end of the year but couldn't find it. Do you have 2012s? Regardless, the average for a given year will still be very close to what your own score report says.
Click to expand...

You can see them all here: http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/academics/licensure.cfm (Click on Summary for the specific year)

I must say, on a completely unrelated note, that U of Virginia is very transparent about their scores. Would be nice if ALL schools did this.
 
DermViser said:
You can see them all here: http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/academics/licensure.cfm (Click on Summary for the specific year)

I must say, on a completely unrelated note, that U of Virginia is very transparent about their scores. Would be nice if ALL schools did this.
Click to expand...

It says 227 for 2012. That's definitely not accurate. There's no way it went up 3 points when I took it that summer and had a score report saying 224. When I look back a few years on those tables, it almost seems like each summary is off by 1 year when just looking at 1st time test takers.

The table separates out 1st and 2nd test takers, while your actual score report does not do that and shows everyone under one mean. That's probably the difference because 2nd time test takers included would definitely lower the 1st time taker's average. Look at 2012, 227 for 1st timers and 196 for 2nd timers. 196, even though the overall examinee # is much less, would definitely lower 227 considerably.

So I think at the end of the day, the most accurate Step 1 mean and SD is still the one listed on individual score reports for that year. Look up the old Step 1 threads on this forum and you should see some ppl posting their score reports.
 
rocketbooster said:
It says 227 for 2012. That's definitely not accurate. There's no way it went up 3 points when I took it that summer and had a score report saying 224. When I look back a few years on those tables, it almost seems like each summary is off by 1 year when just looking at 1st time test takers.

The table separates out 1st and 2nd test takers, while your actual score report does not know do that and shows everyone under one mean. That's probably the difference because 2nd time test takers included would definitely lower the 1st time taker's average. Look at 2012, 227 for 1st timers and 196 for 2nd timers. 196, even though the overall examinee is much less, would definitely lower 227 considerably.

So I think at the end of the day, the most accurate Step 1 mean and SD is still the one listed on score reports for that year. Look up the old Step 1 threads on this forum and you should see some ppl posting their score reports.
Click to expand...

Those are actual score reports released by the NBME sent to the schoool. I doubt they are lying. The mean on your own score report is likely the first time taker mean as the other means are irrelevant.
 
DermViser said:
Those are actual score reports released by the NBME sent to the schoool. I doubt they are lying.
Click to expand...

The table separates out 1st and 2nd test takers, while your actual score report does not do that and shows everyone under one mean. That's probably the difference because 2nd time test takers included would definitely lower the 1st time taker's average. Look at 2012, 227 for 1st timers and 196 for 2nd timers. 196, even though the overall examinee # is much less, would definitely lower 227 considerably.

Above is the reason. There is not an error in the tables. There is an error in your interpretation of the tables. You were only reporting the 1st time test takers average, which is not accurate when you want to know the national mean for a year. You have to include ALL test takers, which those tables you provided do not do.

Therefore, the means and SDs listed on each individual score report that students get is the most accurate one. It may only be specific to their one test, but if you look back to the SDN Step 1 threads, it seems just about everyone usually has the same numbers listed in a given year.

Dermviser, come on bro. Didn't you match to derm, or have you not applied yet? A derm applicant should know how to interpret basic tables, considering a 12 year old would understand this.
 
Last edited:
DermViser said:
There was one post on SDN, where a person said he saw premed undergrads (who got into medical school) carrying First Aid with them. Realize this is MONTHS before they were to start medical school. I should be shocked, but based on how the match is going these days, it doesn't surprise me that these fears have filtered to undergrads.
Click to expand...

I actually just bought first aid last week. I've been using a pdf copy since the beginning of second year though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
rocketbooster said:
The table separates out 1st and 2nd test takers, while your actual score report does not do that and shows everyone under one mean. That's probably the difference because 2nd time test takers included would definitely lower the 1st time taker's average. Look at 2012, 227 for 1st timers and 196 for 2nd timers. 196, even though the overall examinee # is much less, would definitely lower 227 considerably.

Above is the reason. There is not an error in the tables. There is an error in your interpretation of the tables. You were only reporting the 1st time test takers average, which is not accurate when you want to know the national mean for a year. You have to include ALL test takers, which those tables you provided do not do.

Therefore, the means and SDs listed on each individual score report that students get is the most accurate one. It may only be specific to their one test, but if you look back to the SDN Step 1 threads, it seems just about everyone usually has the same numbers listed in a given year.

Dermviser, come on bro. Didn't you match to derm, or have you not applied yet? A derm applicant should know how to interpret basic tables, considering a 12 year old would understand this.
Click to expand...

Uh, read what I typed: "The mean on your own score report is likely the first time taker mean as the other means are irrelevant." I never said there was an error in the tables. The other poster said the means for that year were wrong. Those score reports that UVa posted are the NBME reports themselves for the institution for that year. Compare the number who passed vs. those who failed.
 
DermViser said:
Uh, read what I typed: "The mean on your own score report is likely the first time taker mean as the other means are irrelevant." I never said there was an error in the tables. The other poster said the means for that year were wrong. Those score reports that UVa posted are the NBME reports themselves for the institution for that year. Compare the number who passed vs. those who failed.
Click to expand...

Why would the mean on your score report most likely be the first time test taker mean? That doesn't make any sense. It's unquestionably all the ppl who took your test which includes repeat test takers

Again, use some common sense bro. I thought you matched derm....
 
rocketbooster said:
Why would the mean on your score report most likely be the first time test taker mean? That doesn't make any sense. It's unquestionably all the ppl who took your test which includes repeat test takers

Again, use some common sense bro. I thought you matched derm....
Click to expand...

Bc those who took the test and failed are irrelevant to your score that is in the Pass category, bro. It's comparing apples to apples, bro. They get a chance to take the test again, after already being exposed to the type of questions asked.
 
DermViser said:
Bc those who took the test and failed are irrelevant to your score that is in the Pass category, bro. It's comparing apples to apples, bro. They get a chance to take the test again, after already being exposed to the type of questions asked.
Click to expand...

Yea but the score listed on your own score report includes everyone which is what makes up the national average. The repeat test takers hopefully now pass and will be applying to residency with you, bro
 
rocketbooster said:
Yea but the score listed on your own score report includes everyone which is what makes up the national average. The repeat test takers hopefully now pass and will be applying to residency with you, bro
Click to expand...

:smack: Uh, no it doesn't bro:
99scorescreenshot3.jpg

The mean score listed on your score report is for first-time examinees only, bro. And I've already gone through the match, bro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Lol. You should see the average for Plastics. I'd say 240 is the cutoff for thinking about applying.
 
DermViser said:
:smack: Uh, no it doesn't bro:
99scorescreenshot3.jpg

The mean score listed on your score report is for first-time examinees only, bro. And I've already gone through the match, bro.
Click to expand...

I respect you, bro. I just wanna show you respeckt, BRO
 
caffeinemia said:
I respect you, bro. I just wanna show you respeckt, BRO
Click to expand...
LOL. Yeah, I figured I use the term "bro" with Rocketbooster, since it seems to be a word he uses often in addressing me.
 
DermViser said:
LOL. Yeah, I figured I use the term "bro" with Rocketbooster, since it seems to be a word he uses often in addressing me.
Click to expand...

Are you also a fan of the Southpark?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
FdeKCfR.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We have made an interesting discovery, friends. The mean and sd on score reports likely refers to the previous year's stats.

Also, there was a 3 point increase in the national avg from 2012 to 2013. That is likely why there was a 3 pt increase in the ophtho avg. The 2013 natl avg is 228 so ophtho will probably only increase by 1 next year like it does most years.

This also means all specialties probably increased by 3 this year with the likely 1 pt increase in 2012 and 2013 matches. We won't know for sure until the next Charting Outcomes comes out, but expect a 5 point increase across the map. This is assuming each specialty stayed the same in competitiveness.
 
rocketbooster said:
We have made an interesting discovery, friends. The mean and sd on score reports likely refers to the previous year's stats.

Also, there was a 3 point increase in the national avg from 2012 to 2013. That is likely why there was a 3 pt increase in the ophtho avg. The 2013 natl avg is 228 so ophtho will probably only increase by 1 next year like it does most years.

This also means all specialties probably increased by 3 this year with the likely 1 pt increase in 2012 and 2013 matches. We won't know for sure until the next Charting Outcomes comes out, but expect a 5 point increase across the map. This is assuming each specialty stayed the same in competitiveness.
Click to expand...

I believe DermViser just copied that picture from another forum. I've highlighted the part that I believe he was directly referencing:
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    222.3 KB · Views: 74
rocketbooster said:
This also means all specialties probably increased by 3 this year with the likely 1 pt increase in 2012 and 2013 matches. We won't know for sure until the next Charting Outcomes comes out, but expect a 5 point increase across the map. This is assuming each specialty stayed the same in competitiveness.
Click to expand...

Actually we do.

Careers in Medicine posts the mean data from last year and likely will update it annually. The means aren't moving all over the place, they are close to the same.
 
rocketbooster said:
We have made an interesting discovery, friends. The mean and sd on score reports likely refers to the previous year's stats.

Also, there was a 3 point increase in the national avg from 2012 to 2013. That is likely why there was a 3 pt increase in the ophtho avg. The 2013 natl avg is 228 so ophtho will probably only increase by 1 next year like it does most years.

This also means all specialties probably increased by 3 this year with the likely 1 pt increase in 2012 and 2013 matches. We won't know for sure until the next Charting Outcomes comes out, but expect a 5 point increase across the map. This is assuming each specialty stayed the same in competitiveness.
Click to expand...
This recent 3 point jump across the boards is likely the Pathoma effect. Dr. Sattar just made everybody 3 points smarter, but didn't really improve anybody's competitiveness.
 
@JackShephard said:
Actually we do.

Careers in Medicine posts the mean data from last year and likely will update it annually. The means aren't moving all over the place, they are close to the same.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
The supposed jump in average step 1 scores is overblown on SDN (like nearly everything else). My 2013 score report has the national average at 224, not 228.
 
evilbooyaa said:
I believe DermViser just copied that picture from another forum. I've highlighted the part that I believe he was directly referencing:
Click to expand...
Yes, it was copied from Google Images which already had the red circle on it for some reason. Thanks for clarifying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

D
Step 2 average score by residency program
Replies
7
Views
2K
doc.Junior
D
D
  • Locked
When do we find out the 2023 average Step 2 score?
Replies
28
Views
11K
gyngyn
gyngyn
J
Joint ophtho programs
Replies
0
Views
390
justgotthecall2020
J
D
Below Average Student to Honors?
Replies
8
Views
1K
Styrene
Styrene
P
Specialty advice - Ophtho vs IR
Replies
9
Views
3K
eyeeye_captain
eyeeye_captain
Top