Psych Step 1 Average 2016

[zyxab]

Does anyone know what the average Step 1 score was for people who matched into Psych this year? Or is that data not available?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[phonyreal98]

500.

Nah just kidding. I believe @MacDonaldTriad posted in another thread that the 50th percentile this year was 218. (Unless I misinterpreted his post)

 

[Freddie Mercury]

Data not available. This is usually presented in the "Charting Outcomes in the Match" document, which typically comes out every 2 years. Last one was 2014, so if we're lucky we'll get another one this year.

 

[postbacpremed87]

500.

Nah just kidding. I believe @MacDonaldTriad posted in another thread that the 50th percentile this year was 218. (Unless I misinterpreted his post)

Wow. I thought it would would be a little higher, especially with this new talk of competitiveness.

 

[prok]

500.

Nah just kidding. I believe @MacDonaldTriad posted in another thread that the 50th percentile this year was 218. (Unless I misinterpreted his post)

That can't possibly be right. It would mean a huge drop in competitive despite all the evidence suggesting the opposite. At the very least it would have gone up a few points just because the averages are higher now overall. Maybe they were referring to their specific program?

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I was using the data in my program's "characteristics of matched applicants" where it plots programs within the 25%, 50
% and 75%. The 50% was 218. The charting outcomes 2014 shows the step one average looks to be 220 on a course plot diagram so either it hasn't changed or they are still using the 2014 numbers to plot us.

 

[Leo Aquarius]

500 sounds about right

 

[OldPsychDoc]

500 sounds about right...

...for COMLEX.

 

[Blitz2006]

In 2010: 214
In 2014: 220

So roughly 1.5 pt increase each year? So I'm gonna guess this year it was 224.

 

[J ROD]

I would say it stayed around the 220. I think more folks are just interested in it. Coming from FM, Peds, IM, etc.

 

[lymphocyte]

I would say it stayed around the 220. I think more folks are just interested in it. Coming from FM, Peds, IM, etc.

Yeah, I don't think it's getting more competitive among more competitive students (though the number of MD/PhDs is increasing slightly); I think that it's just being perceived as more acceptable among those with low Step 1 scores. That probably explains the increased competition. I'm happy to be corrected with any concrete data.

 

[J ROD]

I believe there are just more US MD going after Psychiatry now than in the past. It used to be a field where IMG MDs could prosper in the match. Not so much these days.

 

[HarryMTieboutMD]

Keep in mind the national Step 1 score is increasing at a rapid pace. And score maximizing strategies (memorizing first aid, doing UWorld 2x, whatever is on the SDN forums) are becoming the norm. When I started medical school the average was around 218. When I was applying for residency it was mid 220s, and now it is close to 230.

However, I will just note that when I was applying (in 2013), I called the residency training office of a certain program because I had a question about the interview that most people on this board would consider "top tier" or "competitive", and it went to voicemail. The message said "the average step 1 score of matched applicants last year was 211." Now, I imagine this has increased given how the quality of the program, but matching at a solid program remains an option for most US MDs.

 

[Blitz2006]

Keep in mind the national Step 1 score is increasing at a rapid pace. And score maximizing strategies (memorizing first aid, doing UWorld 2x, whatever is on the SDN forums) are becoming the norm. When I started medical school the average was around 218. When I was applying for residency it was mid 220s, and now it is close to 230.

However, I will just note that when I was applying (in 2013), I called the residency training office of a certain program because I had a question about the interview that most people on this board would consider "top tier" or "competitive", and it went to voicemail. The message said "the average step 1 score of matched applicants last year was 211." Now, I imagine this has increased given how the quality of the program, but matching at a solid program remains an option for most US MDs.

Exactly.

There is inflation, everyones scores are going up, across the board.

That's why my guesstimate for this year is 224.

 

[postbacpremed87]

So an American Medical Graduate, be it MD or DO, who gets in the low 220s and applies broadly (AND has proven Psych interest) will have no problems come match time? Sorry - it just seems like the sky is falling and the secret is out.

 

[notdeadyet]

So an American Medical Graduate, be it MD or DO, who gets in the low 220s and applies broadly (AND has proven Psych interest) will have no problems come match time? Sorry - it just seems like the sky is falling and the secret is out.

Definitely true for MDs. I don't see enough DOs to say for osteopaths.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HarryMTieboutMD]

Yeah, you definitely cannot group DOs with US MDs. And US MDs from Harvard/Hopkins/etc are at a greater advantage than US MDs from established US allopathic schools ranked 20ish-50 who are at a greater advantage than the new US MD schools that are popping up everywhere.

Does that mean the applicants from higher ranked med schools will necessarily be better residents? Of course not, but when you have a lot of people from different places applying the two factors that are readily comparable between applicants are 1) board scores and 2) name of medical school.

 

[zyxab]

Sorry - it just seems like the sky is falling and the secret is out.

It seems like that if you go by what neurotic med students say while venting on the internet. FYI, I saw threads from 10 years ago where the psych board was talking about how the sky was falling. However, the data often tell an entirely different story. That's why I asked for this year's Step 1 average. According to MacDonaldTriad, it is basically the same as (or even lower than) last year's...we'll know for sure when Charting Outcomes comes out.

BTW, in 2014 US MDs who got between a 191 and 200 had ~90% chance of matching in Psych.

 

[postbacpremed87]

It seems like that if you go by what neurotic med students say while venting on the internet. FYI, I saw threads from 10 years ago where the psych board was talking about how the sky was falling. However, the data often tell an entirely different story. That's why I asked for this year's Step 1 average. According to MacDonaldTriad, it is basically the same as (or even lower than) last year's...we'll know for sure when Charting Outcomes comes out.

BTW, in 2014 US MDs who got between a 191 and 200 had ~90% chance of matching in Psych.

As a DO I would be unemployed if I scored 191-200 most likely. I really hope I can get a solid mid-tier residency with good training with a score in the 220s, especially since I plan on applying broadly.

 

[notdeadyet]

As a DO I would be unemployed if I scored 191-200 most likely. I really hope I can get a solid mid-tier residency with good training with a score in the 220s, especially since I plan on applying broadly.

Good strategy. And the uncertainty you're feeling was shared by almost all of us when we were preparing to apply. Any but the complete narcissists ask what-ifs and focus on how there are so many better applicants. All you can do is work hard, apply broadly and early, and likely wind up in a fine program.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

BTW, in 2014 US MDs who got between a 191 and 200 had ~90% chance of matching in Psych.

And the difference between the 90% and the 10% were the places applied to, the number applied to, and their behavior at interview. Places is more key than number, and most everyone interviews fine, except the few who don't.
HerryMTieboutMD is right, schools and scores are about the only objective measures. The dye is cast on your school, so that leaves scores. I'm sure programs vary by how much they consider schools and how much they consider scores. Personally I think score importance is an inverted bell shape curve. If you are 1.5 standard deviations high or low, I don't care how good or bad your school is.

 

[masterofmonkeys]

And the difference between the 90% and the 10% were the places applied to, the number applied to, and their behavior at interview. Places is more key than number, and most everyone interviews fine, except the few who don't.
HerryMTieboutMD is right, schools and scores are about the only objective measures. The dye is cast on your school, so that leaves scores. I'm sure programs vary by how much they consider schools and how much they consider scores. Personally I think score importance is an inverted bell shape curve. If you are 1.5 standard deviations high or low, I don't care how good or bad your school is.

That's a very nice summation. I view scores the same way.

 

[Dharma]

Definitely true for MDs. I don't see enough DOs to say for osteopaths.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hate to be a nit picker but saying "osteopaths" isn't kosher anymore. Antiquated. You won't find many modern DOs who would describe themselves as such.

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

Persons who happen to have doctorates of osteopathy, people formerly known as osteopaths, practicing physicians who happen not to be allopathic? What is the PC way to distinguish DOs from MDs?

 

[675015]

Hate to be a nit picker but saying "osteopaths" isn't kosher anymore. Antiquated. You won't find many modern DOs who would describe themselves as such.

Everyone at my sisters DO school calls themselves osteopaths...

 

[notdeadyet]

Hate to be a nit picker but saying "osteopaths" isn't kosher anymore. Antiquated. You won't find many modern DOs who would describe themselves as such.

Ah, thanks. What is the acceptable term now to distinguish osteopaths from allopaths? "DO" isn't right, since we are also talking about students who don't yet have the degree and "DO student" isn't right as it excludes graduates.

But apologies if I offended. A DO student I worked with used the term but my n is very small.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Persons who happen to have doctorates of osteopathy, people formerly known as osteopaths, practicing physicians who happen not to be allopathic? What is the PC way to distinguish DOs from MDs?

The degree is Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine.

Osteopathic Physician is correct term to distinguish us from Osteopaths who are non-physicians.

 

[Dharma]

Ah, thanks. What is the acceptable term now to distinguish osteopaths from allopaths? "DO" isn't right, since we are also talking about students who don't yet have the degree and "DO student" isn't right as it excludes graduates.

But apologies if I offended. A DO student I worked with used the term but my n is very small.

Not offended, just passing along the information. I would just call a student 'student doctor,' 'osteopathic medical student', 'med student,' whatever.

 

[Dharma]

Everyone at my sisters DO school calls themselves osteopaths...

Very few refer to themselves as such in the U.S. The hardcore, old school, heal-by-hands-only DOs do. Maybe she goes to one of these schools where it's pressed upon them. Doubt everyone refers to themselves as such.

The official stance is that "osteopath" is no longer to be used. It's been that way for a while now actually. I believe the original reasoning was to clear up any confusion; that the term can also be used to describe non-physicians in many places around the world.

http://www.osteopathic.org/inside-a...dia-center/Pages/osteopathic-style-guide.aspx

 

[kirkirkir]

Most DO's don't practice osteopathy, they practice medicine. In places like Australia it's illegal for a DO to refer to himself as "osteopath" or "osteopathic physician".

 

[Mad Jack]

Everyone at my sisters DO school calls themselves osteopaths...

Eh, it's nitpicking, but technically osteopaths are people who only do manipulation, while osteopathic physicians are people who do everything else. The reason the difference in terminology exists is that there are osteopaths elsewhere in the world (literally everywhere else- England, Australia, New Zealand, etc) that do not learn medicine but only learn manipulation. In fact, in Australia our osteopathic training is considered so subpar that we're only allowed to refer to ourselves as physicians and aren't allowed to practice osteopathic manipulation at all because the osteopaths have it so hard out for us for learning allopathic-style medicine.

It's all neither here nor there, and I don't really care myself, but I figured I'd let people know why osteopath hasn't been officially used in the US since around the time of the Vietnam War.

Edit: oh, I was beaten to it twice over.

Back on topic, does anyone know how a hypothetical DO with a 250+ fare? What would their ceiling be?

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Eh, it's nitpicking, but technically osteopaths are people who only do manipulation, while osteopathic physicians are people who do everything else. The reason the difference in terminology exists is that there are osteopaths elsewhere in the world (literally everywhere else- England, Australia, New Zealand, etc) that do not learn medicine but only learn manipulation. In fact, in Australia our osteopathic training is considered so subpar that we're only allowed to refer to ourselves as physicians and aren't allowed to practice osteopathic manipulation at all because the osteopaths have it so hard out for us for learning allopathic-style medicine.

It's all neither here nor there, and I don't really care myself, but I figured I'd let people know why osteopath hasn't been officially used in the US since around the time of the Vietnam War.

Edit: oh, I was beaten to it twice over.

Back on topic, does anyone know how a hypothetical DO with a 250+ fare? What would their ceiling be?

It's one of the reasons a degree change in some regards is necessary.

 

[postbacpremed87]

Eh, it's nitpicking, but technically osteopaths are people who only do manipulation, while osteopathic physicians are people who do everything else. The reason the difference in terminology exists is that there are osteopaths elsewhere in the world (literally everywhere else- England, Australia, New Zealand, etc) that do not learn medicine but only learn manipulation. In fact, in Australia our osteopathic training is considered so subpar that we're only allowed to refer to ourselves as physicians and aren't allowed to practice osteopathic manipulation at all because the osteopaths have it so hard out for us for learning allopathic-style medicine.

It's all neither here nor there, and I don't really care myself, but I figured I'd let people know why osteopath hasn't been officially used in the US since around the time of the Vietnam War.

Edit: oh, I was beaten to it twice over.

Back on topic, does anyone know how a hypothetical DO with a 250+ fare? What would their ceiling be?

I think you are good to go....except for tip top

 

[cbrons]

I heard the overall step 1 avg went down last year

Sent from my SM-N910P using SDN mobile

 

[MLT2MT2DO]

Eh, it's nitpicking, but technically osteopaths are people who only do manipulation, while osteopathic physicians are people who do everything else. The reason the difference in terminology exists is that there are osteopaths elsewhere in the world (literally everywhere else- England, Australia, New Zealand, etc) that do not learn medicine but only learn manipulation. In fact, in Australia our osteopathic training is considered so subpar that we're only allowed to refer to ourselves as physicians and aren't allowed to practice osteopathic manipulation at all because the osteopaths have it so hard out for us for learning allopathic-style medicine.

It's all neither here nor there, and I don't really care myself, but I figured I'd let people know why osteopath hasn't been officially used in the US since around the time of the Vietnam War.

Edit: oh, I was beaten to it twice over.

Back on topic, does anyone know how a hypothetical DO with a 250+ fare? What would their ceiling be?

Two years ago there was still a lot of DO bias among even upper mid programs regardless of a 250+. Matching itself will be a breeze but without research or strong allopathic sub-i letters people will vocally write you off as "a good test taker". It can't be that you're smart and hard working or else you wouldn't be a DO.

Regardless whether it be UC-davis or a community program that doesn't want you because of your degree, you wouldn't want to be there.

Sent from my SM-G900V using SDN mobile

 

[Waldeinsamkeit]

500.

Nah just kidding. I believe @MacDonaldTriad posted in another thread that the 50th percentile this year was 218. (Unless I misinterpreted his post)

Is there a way to know what the average STEP 1 score is for one of the more competitive psych residencies? I tried looking at the individual program websites, but not finding any data.

 

[DrSatan]

Is there a way to know what the average STEP 1 score is for one of the more competitive psych residencies? I tried looking at the individual program websites, but not finding any data.

Sometimes it'll give cut offs on websites. Otherwise FREIDA occasionally has "averages" that at least helps give an idea. I know there is a website that shows step 1 & step 2 score percentiles for each specialty. You'll have to Google that though. Think it was on the NRMP match data website or AAMC site somewhere.

Edit:
Data and Analysis - AAMC
Data and Analysis - AAMC

 

[Mad Jack]

Persons who happen to have doctorates of osteopathy, people formerly known as osteopaths, practicing physicians who happen not to be allopathic? What is the PC way to distinguish DOs from MDs?

I prefer "bone wizard."

 

[MacDonaldTriad]

I prefer "bone wizard."

I like bone wizard, bone witches or bone warlocks wouldn't be PC in today's gender fluid society.

 

[slappy]

I prefer "bone wizard."