I would say that is cutting it pretty close...I have heard lots of people say that around 60% would be a passing score, but in my experience, it might take a bit more. I was overall around 68% and during the last two weeks low to mid 70's and i got a 192/78. but, i did expect to do much better, i think i just made a lot of bad guesses, got unlucky.
don't rely to heavily on score correlations btwn q-bank, nbme self assessment and step 1. just prepare, work your but off and take the test when you feel ready. but, i would also be very careful if you are not comfortably in the low to mid 60's at least.
q bank score is not a good indicator of your score or of passing. I finished with a 57% (didn't reuse questions), and ended up with a 220 on the real thing. take the online self assessment. they designed it to eventually be a predictor of passing the real test.
the mean is set at 500, and someone on this site calculated that a score of 335-360 would be equivalent to passing, so I would think if you got at least a 400, you could feel confident that you would pass the real thing.
again, i would be careful with even correlating the nbme with a real score...i got a 470 or 480 on the real thing, which should put me very close to the mean, and my actual score was closer to failing than the mean....
correlations are variable and not so reliable. go with how you feel about your knowledge, and use the tests to help you study and build confidence with the format.
There's a lot of variability between Q bank scores and Step I scores, but there is some rough relationship. But it depends on a number of variables. One of the most important is simply how far in advance of the test you are doing the questions (especially if you are the typical 2nd year and are still going through large chunks of pathology). Another is how much review you have done before (and will be doing) during Q-bank.
I had a friend from last year who got the 6 month Q-bank and started off with scores in the 50's and ended up with a Step I above 250. I can think of at least 2 reasons for her low initial scores. 1.) A lot of questions were foreign to her, since she was still in the middle of 2nd year. 2.) She started doing questions before starting any kind of review, using them as a learning tool in themselves.
Conversely, I know people that got decent scores on Q-bank (high 60's, low 70's), but didn't do as well on Step I. Why? Well, part of the reason is that they used them toward the end. They had already come close to maxing out, so to speak, having had the entire 2nd year curriculum and some preliminary review, when they started q-bank.
So, when someone reports a percentage it should always be interpreted in context. If you still have 3 months before step I and have a q-bank average of 60%, that's not cause for alarm. If you have done almost all your studying for the exam and have already had the 2nd year curriculum, that's another matter.