From what I have gathered (as a fellow soon-to-be applicant), the significance of Step 1 lies in the fact that everyone has taken it by the time they apply, allowing for comparison. I think a much higher Step 2 score could help balance out a lower Step 1 score, if it's in there early enough. Of course, there may be some programs that screen by Step 1 score and unfortunately there's nothing you can do about that and no way to know which programs those are.
From your article, the break down for peds is as follows, with Step 2CK slightly ahead of Step 1:
Required clerkship grades 4.02 (1)
Recommendation letters 3.73 (2)
Grades in senior electives in specialty 3.70 (3)
No. of clerkship honors 3.70 (3)
USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge score 3.67 (5)
Audition electives 3.58 (6)
Step 2 Clinical Skills pass 3.57 (7)
Class rank 3.49 (8)
USMLE Step 1 score 3.43 (9)
Membership in Alpha Omega Alpha 3.23 (10)
Value of medical student performance evaluation 3.23 (10)
Grades in senior electives not in specialty 3.21 (12)
Medical school reputation 3.11 (13)
Medical school academic awards 3.09 (14)
Grades in preclinical courses 2.79 (15)
Published research 2.54 (16)
* Program directors rated importance of each criterion on a five-point scale (5 􏰀 critical; 1 􏰀 unimportant, or 5 􏰀 agree; 1 􏰀 disagree).
Not statistically different from the top criterion in that specialty.
Indicates a tie in rank number. When a tie occurred, the criteria were assigned the same rank number.
-----
I also came across this article, which highlights the importance of the interview:
Ambul Pediatr. 2005 Jul-Aug;5(4):216-20.
The impact of the interview in pediatric residency selection.
Swanson WS, Harris MC, Master C, Gallagher PR, Mauro AE, Ludwig S.
Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To better understand the impact of USMLE scores and interview scores on the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) rank of applicants to the residency program at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.
METHODOLOGY: We evaluated 935 applicants' files from 2000, 2001, and 2002. For each candidate, one interviewer had access to the full application, while the other interviewer was blinded to USMLE scores and grades. Interview scores were generated by both interviewers. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate relationships between USMLE scores, interview scores, and NRMP rank list number.
RESULTS: There were a wide range of USMLE scores among candidates who interviewed (range 181 to 269, 227.7 +/- 17.1, M +/- standard deviation). USMLE scores were weakly correlated to nonblinded interview scores (r = -0.17), final committee scores (r = -0.26), and NRMP ranking (r = -0.21): P < .0005. Blinded interviews did not correlate with USMLE scores. Both nonblinded and blinded interviews had stronger correlations with NRMP rank list number (r = 0.49, P < .0005 and r = 0.36, P < .0005, respectively). The nonblinded interview accounted for 20.6% of variance in the NRMP rank list order.
CONCLUSIONS: Interview scores were the most important variable for candidate ranking on the NRMP list. Furthermore, when interviewers had access to board scores, there was a modest correlation to performance on the USMLE. While interviews may reflect a candidate's personality, they may not effectively measure desired characteristics when access to academic markers is unrestricted. We suggest incorporating blinded interviews into the selection process to give candidates a better opportunity to display communication skills, emotional stability, and "fit" for the program.
