Two digit score or three digit score?

[Typical]

---

Members don't see this ad.

It seems that the correlation of the three digit score with the two digit score varies every year. Please comment if you happen to know which score is more frequently looked at by PDs for residency selection.

 

[flumazenil]

majority of the people i talked to and are doing ERAS tell me 2 digit score. Even the application page for many residency programs have a 2 digit cutoff, but i have also heard of directors saying scores above "230" are required for certain feilds...so my answer is im leaning more toward 2 digit.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

Just exactly how the two digit score is determined is just a bit too mysterious for most people to understand or use.

 

[Long Dong]

On almost all of my transitional year interviews I could see my 3 digit board score on the top of the interviewers sheet. At a few of my derm interviews the pd/interviewer remaked on my 3 digit board score being pretty good.

 

[blz]

it better be the three digit score...shoot.

 

[sga814]

I can see two digit as being a cut-off for getting on the playing field, then three-digit for combing through the sand

if that makes sense 😀

 

[UCLAstudent]

it better be the three digit score...shoot.

It is. I've asked many residents/attendings about matching into a competitive specialty, and they always seem to give me an answer that stratifies applicants based on the 3-digit score. Nobody's ever mentioned the 2-digit score.

 

[Tired]

It seems that the correlation of the three digit score with the two digit score varies every year. Please comment if you happen to know which score is more frequently looked at by PDs for residency selection.

The two digit score is a bit less discriminatory than the 3 digit score. Lots of people, especially applying to more competitive programs, will have a "99". But that doesn't really tell PDs if they got a 230 or 260, which can be a big difference.

I was never asked for the 2-digit score.

 

[PeepshowJohnny]

I hate that two digit score. I've heard so many rumors about what that stupid thing means and it's importance. Why does this test have to be so vague about what it really tests?

 

[Typical]

I hate that two digit score. I've heard so many rumors about what that stupid thing means and it's importance. Why does this test have to be so vague about what it really tests?

Would you share these rumors? It's nice to have a frew theories about it! Everyone here on SDN says it has no purpose, and I can see why since these are the people who have worked hard to score way higher than just a 99 (235). But, I am sure it must have a purpose if it's there, otherwise, they would not waste their time to report this number.
I just encountered an interesting fact on the 2007 Mech Charting, when comparing the USMLE scores as a predictor value to calculate the OR as a predictor of matching, they have categorized the USMLE scores into three groups, and the category with the high USMLE score is determined as >235. This number is equivalant to the two digit number of 99 for this year.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

The two digit score is used by state medical boards. All state medical boards require passage of the USMLE as part of the licensing process. Written into law in every state is that you must get a 75 to pass.

The USMLE regularly reviews the exams to set the pass rate. Rather than grade the exam differently, they move the pass rate up or down. In the last few years the pass level for both Step 1 and 2 has moved from 175 to 182.

When they do this, they adjust the 2 digit to 3 digit conversion. Therefore, in the past a 175 = 75 (and a 174=74=FAIL). Now, a 182=75=PASS and 181=74=FAIL.

The whole point is that when the USMLE changes their pass level, the two digit cutoff doesn't change so that the states don't have to change their laws.

Most importantly, the two digit score is not a percent nor a percentile.

 

[Typical]

The two digit score is used by state medical boards. All state medical boards require passage of the USMLE as part of the licensing process. Written into law in every state is that you must get a 75 to pass.

The USMLE regularly reviews the exams to set the pass rate. Rather than grade the exam differently, they move the pass rate up or down. In the last few years the pass level for both Step 1 and 2 has moved from 175 to 182.

When they do this, they adjust the 2 digit to 3 digit conversion. Therefore, in the past a 175 = 75 (and a 174=74=FAIL). Now, a 182=75=PASS and 181=74=FAIL.

The whole point is that when the USMLE changes their pass level, the two digit cutoff doesn't change so that the states don't have to change their laws.

Most importantly, the two digit score is not a percent nor a percentile.

This totally makes sense. Additionally, I would think that the two digit score is a good determinant of the value of your three digit score regardless of the period of time you took your exam. Lets assume that in 50 years from now, the passing score will be 235, which would be equavelant to just a 75. If you also claim that you scored 235, there is nothing special about it, however, when it's combined with the two digit score of 99, it certainly reveals its value for the time that the exam was taken.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

This totally makes sense. Additionally, I would think that the two digit score is a good determinant of the value of your three digit score regardless of the period of time you took your exam. Lets assume that in 50 years from now, the passing score will be 235, which would be equavelant to just a 75. If you also claim that you scored 235, there is nothing special about it, however, when it's combined with the two digit score of 99, it certainly reveals its value for the time that the exam was taken.

Why would anyone care what how good our scores are 50 years from now? It's a test to compare you to your peers who should have taken it at the same time. As progdirector indicated, the two digit score is to satisfy some legal mumbo jumbo. Otherwise its completely worthless, because everyone who did mildly well has a 99.

 

[Terpskins99]

Why would anyone care what how good our scores are 50 years from now? It's a test to compare you to your peers who should have taken it at the same time. As progdirector indicated, the two digit score is to satisfy some legal mumbo jumbo. Otherwise its completely worthless, because everyone who did mildly well has a 99.

A 99 is doing mildly well. 🙄

If you say so.

 

[Typical]

A 99 is doing mildly well. 🙄

If you say so.

99 is just the average on the SDN, not even mildy well; I think he was trying to be nice to offend anyone

 

[lord_jeebus]

This totally makes sense. Additionally, I would think that the two digit score is a good determinant of the value of your three digit score regardless of the period of time you took your exam. Lets assume that in 50 years from now, the passing score will be 235, which would be equavelant to just a 75. If you also claim that you scored 235, there is nothing special about it, however, when it's combined with the two digit score of 99, it certainly reveals its value for the time that the exam was taken.

The three-digit score is designed to reflect the same level of performance regardless of year. The two-digit score is useless for this purpose.

Assuming that Step I continues to exist in 50 years, the pass line might be different but would not be anything like 235.