RISE scores?

[TMZ2007]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

So can I interpret my better-than-average scores as anything other than doing well on the RISE? (Correlation with boards, etc.?)

 

[mario2010]

same question ? is there a correlation b/w RISE scores and board passing rates ?

 

[KCShaw]

I know of no formal correlation. Anecdotally and logically those who do very well on the RISE are more likely to pass the boards than those who do very poorly on the RISE. I wouldn't put particular weight on specific "numbers" beyond the simple fact that better is better, and you should aim to be with or above your year level on average (in areas you have done a rotation in, for 1st/some 2nd years). You may hear that if you score X on the RISE then you'll pass the corresponding part of the boards, but despite there being no study (that I know of) to support such claims, I think it's a little like saying if you cross 5 lanes of traffic blindfolded during rush hour without getting bumped then you'll be able to do it again tomorrow while walking on your hands.

Doing well on the RISE means you did well on the RISE, and probably that you've done adequately so far in keeping pace with everyone else. Don't let it give you a false sense of security that you don't need to study anymore, because the next step to the boards is an upward step, not a sidestep.

 

[KeratinPearls]

I know of no formal correlation. Anecdotally and logically those who do very well on the RISE are more likely to pass the boards than those who do very poorly on the RISE. I wouldn't put particular weight on specific "numbers" beyond the simple fact that better is better, and you should aim to be with or above your year level on average (in areas you have done a rotation in, for 1st/some 2nd years). You may hear that if you score X on the RISE then you'll pass the corresponding part of the boards, but despite there being no study (that I know of) to support such claims, I think it's a little like saying if you cross 5 lanes of traffic blindfolded during rush hour without getting bumped then you'll be able to do it again tomorrow while walking on your hands.

Doing well on the RISE means you did well on the RISE, and probably that you've done adequately so far in keeping pace with everyone else. Don't let it give you a false sense of security that you don't need to study anymore, because the next step to the boards is an upward step, not a sidestep.

My program director said a score of 500 and above should be your target for passing boards.

 

[schrute]

Doing well on the RISE means you did well on the RISE, and probably that you've done adequately so far in keeping pace with everyone else. Don't let it give you a false sense of security that you don't need to study anymore, because the next step to the boards is an upward step, not a sidestep.

Ditto, though would suggest that doing well in a section like "micro" or "chemistry" is more dependent on having studied for the RISE or simply having recently encountered the material, as CP things like that comprise a significantly smaller proportion of training than surg path (or they at least aren't hammered home day in and day out)...which is why people generally fair better on the AP portion of boards vs the CP...IMHO.

 

[KCShaw]

My program director said a score of 500 and above should be your target for passing boards.

Why settle for 500 (a common number I hear bantered about in this context)? Your target should be high, and you shouldn't be "satisfied" that you'll pass the boards by reaching a RISE target. I know people who have done better than that and didn't pass the corresponding part of the boards -- but also those who have not quite done as well as that and passed. It's a just a number. Nothing wrong with feeling good about doing well, etc., my point is merely that while you might use it as a vague gauge vs your peers, don't get caught up in it like almost every resident does, and don't think that because you hit a magic number you are "ready" for that part of the boards.

 

[2121115]

It should tell you your relative strengths and weaknesses. Don't put much more emphasis on it than that. Programs who use absolute cut offs for promotion, etc are not using it correctly.

 

[zao275]

ASCP and ABP have looked into this relationship and are currently working on getting that info published. That is all I know about it right now. So be on the lookout for the article (they did not mention which journal it might be in).

 

[Cyan]

.

 

[Ombret]

My score report included handwritten congratulations from Juan Rosai, does that mean I will pass my boards?

 

[gbwillner]

ASCP and ABP have looked into this relationship and are currently working on getting that info published. That is all I know about it right now. So be on the lookout for the article (they did not mention which journal it might be in).

I'm gonna guess it's going to be a while. The score for each section goes into the 6-700 range, right? Look at the difference between PGY1-4 for each section, you'll see it's only like 10-20 pts/year (that's like a 2% difference in score!!!). The standard deviation within each class is likely significantly more than the difference between classes. To see any statistical difference, you'd probably need like 100K people taking this test. Also, you can even account for the rising score on the fact that there are repeat questions, giving more senior residents an advantage in score. And the statistical difference you do see will probably be no better than something like: "scoring a 500 significantly increases your chance of passing the boards by 0.25%". Furthermore, this test itself likely means nothing for board prep- as people who are good at taking tests, well, do well on tests. If you did well on your MCAT, STEP1-3, etc, you will probably do well on the boards regardless of what your RISE score is (although you probably did well).

I think the problem lies in the fact that:
1. People take this test for a variety of different reasons, and there is no "passing" grade. So some people will study, while others do not. If a 2nd year studies a section very hard, they are likely to do as well or better than a 4th year who does not prepare.
2. Monitoring. There is none, formally. Some places this is a group test, destroying any meaning to a cumulative score. Some people take it at home with their books. Some take it "proctored" with open books. Who knows what goes on?
3. Some programs have formal tutoring/test prep sessions. These likely include questions remembered from previous years. Other programs do nothing like this. I bet if you look at the scores in the former programs they will be significantly better than the latter.
4. Some programs use your score to punish you. Those people will be motivated to study and do well. Others have no motivation to even try.

Bottom line: I think this test is a complete waste of time and money. The only possible use is to help guage your own progress, assuming you approach the test the same way every year.

 

[path28]

Anyone have the standard deviation data for each year and overall that gets sent to PD's? Just wondering what the spread is for each class.

 

[gbwillner]

Anyone have the standard deviation data for each year and overall that gets sent to PD's? Just wondering what the spread is for each class.

I doubt they would ever release that information because it would show you how worthless the test is.

 

[lipomas]

Do they account for the people who cheat on it? Do programs still allow you to take it on your own? My program when I was there just gave us the login info and told us to take it on the honor system. Amazingly I think most people were honest. But we had good residents, and the PD told us the RISE would not impact our progression or evaluations at all. In programs where it might, I can see other things happening.

Of course, the first time I took the RISE it was on paper and it was proctored, so the internet age changed things a bit and this all might be a new development.

I have heard that doing well on RISE correlates with boards. Wouldn't be surprising. I suspect doing well on the USMLEs correlates also, even though the only similarities are that they are tests you have to study for. You could probably correlate with college organic chemistry scores. I bet people who aced orgo in college probably pass the boards with a higher rate than those who didn't.

 

[Ombret]

Maybe the small difference between PGY1 and PGY4 on the RISE just shows that year of training is not a good predictor of anything. Some first years are ready to be fellows, and I have known some fellows I might have mistaken for first years.

 

[gbwillner]

Maybe the small difference between PGY1 and PGY4 on the RISE just shows that year of training is not a good predictor of anything. Some first years are ready to be fellows, and I have known some fellows I might have mistaken for first years.

That's a much more unsettling interpretation than "the test sucks". But I agree.

 

[2121115]

Some first years are ready to be fellows, and I have known some fellows I might have mistaken for first years.

Umm.... no.

 

[sleeping beauty]

a higher score is certainly better than a lower score.

i scored 812 in one subject. what does it mean? i don't know. what i know fore sure is that a low score will not discourage me to try my best to do every rotation well and a high score will never prevent me to absorb more.