USMLE Step 1 Statistics

[musicphan]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Where can statistics such as national average, standard deviation, etc. for USMLE step 1 be found? I checked usmle.org and only found passing rates.

Thanks.

 

[doc05]

these values vary from year to year. I took step 1 in June 2003 and the mean was 217, SD=24.

 

[Jim Picotte]

**Post corrected**

I took it June 2000 and the mean was 215 with a SD of 20. I posted an analysis of Step scores a year or two ago, you can do a search for my name to find it.

I have my score reports in hand. For Step 2 December 2001 the mean was 210 with SD of 23 and for Step 3 May 2003 the mean was 211 with SD of 18.

 

[MedGeek42]

In 2002 it was 216 with a mean of 24. I wonder what happened in 2001?

Y'know, this actually affects my options for residency because one of my 'aces in the hole' is a high Board score. If I wait too long, its value decreases.

 

[musicphan]

I appreciate the replies so far.

Are these statistics not officially released? To be spread by word of mouth, wouldn't there have to be an original source?

Thanks for your help.

 

[MedGeek42]

The official source is the score report: it tells you how everyone else did.

 

[Idiopathic]

Originally posted by MedGeek42
In 2002 it was 216 with a mean of 24. I wonder what happened in 2001?

Y'know, this actually affects my options for residency because one of my 'aces in the hole' is a high Board score. If I wait too long, its value decreases.

the two-digit should be normalized from year to year. An 85 in 2000 should equate to an 85 in 2005. Right? I agree your three-digit can be affected, but I have heard that many programs weigh your two-digit as much or more.

 

[uclacrewdude]

Originally posted by Idiopathic
the two-digit should be normalized from year to year. An 85 in 2000 should equate to an 85 in 2005. Right? I agree your three-digit can be affected, but I have heard that many programs weigh your two-digit as much or more.

i dont understand why there's a 2 digit score and a 3 digit score ... whats the deal with that? is the 2 digit your raw score of anatomy or physiology sections? is it your percentile? how does it play into your 3 digit score?

 

[Idiopathic]

The two digit is similar to a % score, and that way, a 85 in 2000 will correlate with an 85 in 2004, even though the three-digit score may have changed. I think it can just be considered a percentile (i.e. scored better than 85% of test takers) but I know that isnt a hard and fast rule, since no one knows how the damn test is graded.

 

[neilc]

Originally posted by Idiopathic
The two digit is similar to a % score, and that way, a 85 in 2000 will correlate with an 85 in 2004, even though the three-digit score may have changed. I think it can just be considered a percentile (i.e. scored better than 85% of test takers) but I know that isnt a hard and fast rule, since no one knows how the damn test is graded.

i really don't think this is the case...an 85 puts you near the middle of the bell shaped curve...i would think it puts you in the top 40% or so, but certainly not the top 85%.

the two digit is simply scaled, with 75 being set as a pass. it shouldn't be taken as a percentile.

 

[Idiopathic]

Yeah, I tried to make the point that it wasnt a percentage, but that someone could look at it as one, since it was a standardozed representation of how you did compared to how the other test-takers did AND to how the prebious years did. I forgot about 75 being a pass, that definitely skews the ywo-digit score downward.

 

[MedGeek42]

So the TWO-DIGIT SCORE is scaled to the population taking the test but the THREE-DIGIT SCORE isn't? That's interesting...
Since scores as 'low' as 245 supposedly map to 99 that would mean there's no point in scoring above a 245...odd...

 

[Cristagali]

My two cents worth. Even though NBME is the "lead" organization for licensing physicians in the US, there are also 50 different state medical boards who actually say you can or cannot practice in their state. Because the state boards used a two digit system previously (and currently), NBME had to find a way to take the more "accurate" three digit score, and by some unknown, "NASA rocket equation", translate it into the two digit score for use by the states. For sure though, it is NOT a percentage, but theoretically, it's exactly how the residency programs use it! rightly or wrongly! Also the NBME raised the three digit passing score to 182 from 176 a few years ago. So did the doc who made a 75 with the old score, would he not make it this time around? The big mystery!😎

 

[Cristagali]

I think idiopathic is probably right. The two digit score averages your score with US and Canadian test takers from the previous years. How many, not sure. 😎

 

[Idiopathic]

The problem is that the testers either get bettor or worse, but there still has to be a way to relate them from year-to-year, and it helps avoid grade inflation. When the mean was 200 (SD=20), a 240 was in the top 3% of all takers. Now, with the mean @215 or so, and the SD around 24, a score of 240 is in the top 15% of test takers, which is why the two digit score is needed.