- Joined
- Mar 16, 2019
- Messages
- 168
- Reaction score
- 59
To those who have taken both, which one did you find more difficult/stressful and why? I'm particularly interested in hearing from people who had a more average MCAT score (not >515+)
Not to say that simply passing is enough, but when >95% of medical students pass on their first try, I think the odds are very much in your favor 😉 .Thank the Lord you said that Moko lol.
On the other hand, you do have to think about this. Anyone can technically take the MCAT, but you’re taking those top scorers (who get into medical school) and now competing against them for the best step scores. I’m not a med student, but that’s gotta be a source of stress in that regard
Not to say that simply passing is enough, but when >95% of medical students pass on their first try, I think the odds are very much in your favor 😉 .
As a general rule, once you're in medical school, we will do everything we can to ensure that you succeed. For better or for worse, Step scores play a major role in matching, and we know how important match lists are to potential applicants..
I have it on good authority that some medical schools even let you fail a pre-clinical class or two without any record of it whatsoever.
The USMLE is an entirely different beast that is first and foremost testing your knowledge base / how much you memorized. Someone that memorized twice as much of First Aid will always score higher than someone who only knows half of it. An example would be a question describing a specific virus, that then asks you whether that virus is a DNA virus, positive sense RNA, or negative sense RNA. Theres no way to really reason out a correct answer, you either know it or you dont.
If you failed a class and remediated, it goes on your record, and it affects your class rank.I have it on good authority that some medical schools even let you fail a pre-clinical class or two without any record of it whatsoever.
Oh and I'd also say the stressfulness of the Step1/USMLE entirely depends on your specialty of interest. If you want to be a surgical sub specialist (e.g. orthopedics, neurosurg, plastics, ophthalmology, urology, ENT, etc) you need to beat 80-90% of US medical students, which is VERY hard and stressful. Whereas if you are aiming for less competitive/community practice like family med or pediatrics, you really just need to comfortably pass it and can match fine with a below average score.
Edit: One final thing I'll add since premeds might not be aware of it:
The Step1 has become such an overwhelming determinant of your residency match that it's becoming the norm to begin your Step1 studying a year or more ahead of time, usually via flashcards/anki, and many students are prioritizing it over their actual school curriculum. It's becoming such a source of stress and distraction that the major education stakeholder groups (e.g. AMA, AAMC, student representatives, etc) held a convention a few months ago to formally recommend that the NBME consider changing the USMLE grading to Pass/Fail or quartiles, among other recommendations. You can read about it on the INCUS pages here:
Home | United States Medical Licensing Examination
www.usmle.org
It's very possible by the time you guys are taking the Step 1, there wont be any such thing as a 250+ target for competitive specialties any more.
What initiated the motive to make these changes to the exam? Why is it necessary to make it more of an aptitude exam and less what it was (still mostly is?)?I'm not sure when you took Step 1, but the NBME has overhauled its question-writing process to marginalize items that rely on straight memorization. Each book (section) of USMLE has fewer items than years past, and they are essentially all vignette- or experiment-based, meaning the questions are longer. This has led to an increase in time per question from 72 to 90 seconds. They are also flushing out the classic keywords that have historically made many items straightforward exercises in clue hunting.
Suffice to say that every year Step 1 will more closely resemble an aptitude test, with a large knowledge fund being necessary but not sufficient.
Thank the Lord you said that Moko lol.
On the other hand, you do have to think about this. Anyone can technically take the MCAT, but you’re taking those top scorers (who get into medical school) and now competing against them for the best step scores. I’m not a med student, but that’s gotta be a source of stress in that regard
But I think the idea is that even if you do OK son the USMLE, you still WILL be a doctor. You WILL be an MD/DO. If you don’t do well on The MCAT, you may not be able to become a physician
LolI’d rather be a bio major working at Starbucks than an in debt surgical prelim resident in rural Nebraska any day
this is a pipe dream of med ed to feel like they test like true thinking subjects like physics,math, quant econ, philosophy, logic, comp sciWhat initiated the motive to make these changes to the exam? Why is it necessary to make it more of an aptitude exam and less what it was (still mostly is?)?
I took it in May. I'll say it had a lot less buzzwords and pure regurgitation than older practice NBMEs, for sure. But it was still much, much more a test of knowledge than reasoning.I'm not sure when you took Step 1, but the NBME has overhauled its question-writing process to marginalize items that rely on straight memorization. Each book (section) of USMLE has fewer items than years past, and they are essentially all vignette- or experiment-based, meaning the questions are longer. This has led to an increase in time per question from 72 to 90 seconds. They are also flushing out the classic keywords that have historically made many items straightforward exercises in clue hunting.
Suffice to say that every year Step 1 will more closely resemble an aptitude test, with a large knowledge fund being necessary but not sufficient.
There definitely were a lot more experiment interpretation / reasoning questions on my actual Step1 than any of the old NBMEs, and a lot less buzzwords.this is a pipe dream of med ed to feel like they test like true thinking subjects like physics,math, quant econ, philosophy, logic, comp sci
wow dark circular lesion instead of escher for anthrax so much thinking.... try to learn only concepts and you will goof so hard. the base is still all heavy heavy memorization
it is still a memorization contest. btw I just took STEP2CK in May.
It changes what the upper end target will be. Right now the typical goal for a competitive specialty in a desirable location is top 10-15% of test takers. Changing the system to quartiles would make it so "Quartile 1" was the norm to match these, literally twice as easy a target to hit.Do they really think changing it to quartiles will make a difference? That is the equivalent of changing MCAT scoring from a 45 point scale to a 528 scale. It is arbitrary.
If you failed a class and remediated, it goes on your record, and it affects your class rank.
But I think the idea is that even if you do OK son the USMLE, you still WILL be a doctor. You WILL be an MD/DO. If you don’t do well on The MCAT, you may not be able to become a physician
Something else to highlight is that the Step1 has a massive confidence interval and you aren't allowed to retake it. More specifically, its +/- EIGHT POINTS just to have 66% confidence.Not at every school.
You'll realize later on that simply becoming a doctor isn't good enough. There are honestly fields of medicine I would rather leave medicine all together than have to do on a daily basis. Your USMLE is vital to being able to have options, and you are taking the test against probably the smartest overall testing pool in the world. Even hitting the median is honestly much harder than most pre-meds realize. The MCAT is largely a reading comprehension/problem solving test, whereas USMLE is a knowledge based test except the pool of knowledge they can use to design questions is essentially endless.
90-95 Percentile MCAT
Mid 240s Step 1.
Instead of P/F, lets just have students take Step 1 twice and then average the scores./sMore specifically, its +/- EIGHT POINTS just to have 66% confidence.
Except a student who has studied 400 hours does not know whether their current level of knowledge puts them at 74% (second quartile) or 76% (first quartile), so the incentive will be to study an additional 100 hours (or however much more time they can squeak out) to ensure they haven't missed the 1st quartile by a few percent. The only way to really dial it back is to make it a true P/F. Even then being how important the test is to one's career, the incentive is to maximize studying....nobody wants to fail by a few percent so it's hard to justify leaving any amount of free time unstudied.It changes what the upper end target will be. Right now the typical goal for a competitive specialty in a desirable location is top 10-15% of test takers. Changing the system to quartiles would make it so "Quartile 1" was the norm to match these, literally twice as easy a target to hit.
Yeah the honest answer is, it cant be. With a 66% CI of 16 points, that means it's a 95% CI of 32 points. My own 95% CI spanned the entire range from 230s to 270s, so all they can confidently say is that I'm somewhere between average and top 1%.Instead of P/F, lets just have students take Step 1 twice and then average the scores./s
Serious question, how can a test be valid when the confidence interval can have you be anywhere across an entire 20-30 percentile range?
One way to do it would be to develop a blind composite score made up of class rank + USMLE scores.
But maybe that's more desirable because its more balanced.
Serious question, how can a test be valid when the confidence interval can have you be anywhere across an entire 20-30 percentile range?
It's true you might get screwed by falling slightly short of a quartile cutoff, but honestly you're much more likely to be helped than hurt by it. When you look at the NRMP data, theres not a lot of sub-74th percentile scores applying for those specialties anyways. Especially the most competitive places where you really wanted a 250+, those are the only ones that might demand top quartile. The more accessible programs that were matching lots of lower scores will just switch to cutting off the bottom half and matching Quartile 1 and 2 folks.Except a student who has studied 400 hours does not know whether their current level of knowledge puts them at 74% (second quartile) or 76% (first quartile), so the incentive will be to study an additional 100 hours (or however much more time they can squeak out) to ensure they haven't missed the 1st quartile by a few percent. The only way to really dial it back is to make it a true P/F. Even then being how important the test is to one's career, the incentive is to maximize studying....nobody wants to fail by a few percent so it's hard to justify leaving any amount of free time unstudied.
One way to do it would be to develop a blind composite score made up of class rank + USMLE scores. Residencies would be blind to the specific elements of the composite score so there would not be as much weight on the USMLE. However, that pressure would get distributed over to the grades/class rank a bit. But maybe that's more desirable because its more balanced.
On the flip side, I've yet to hear any good arguments in defense of the USMLE in it's current format and current role. It makes absolutely no sense that someone needs to beat 80% of others on that exam to become a specialized surgeon. And I've yet to see anything on rotations that would back up the idea that higher step 1 = better resident. If I had to try and pick who had the highest and lowest step1 scores out of the Hopkins residents Ive rotated with, I would be 100% guessing. Vast swaths of what I learned to score well was useless basic science background in biochem, immunology, drug mechanisms, microbio nitty gritty, etc and none of that came up ONCE on the medicine floor.In every one of these threads a new idea gets proffered and they get worse and worse. Using grades/class rank is a horrible idea because of how unstandardized it is. Some schools don’t even rank at all.
I have made my stance on this matter very clear in multiple threads and I have yet to see any sort of change proposed that is better than the current system we have. I find the arguments for a change in USMLE scoring to be extremely uncompelling.
On the flip side, I've yet to hear any good arguments in defense of the USMLE in it's current format and current role. It makes absolutely no sense that someone needs to beat 80% of others on that exam to become a specialized surgeon. And I've yet to see anything on rotations that would back up the idea that higher step 1 = better resident. If I had to try and pick who had the highest and lowest step1 scores out of the Hopkins residents Ive rotated with, I would be 100% guessing. Vast swaths of what I learned to score well was useless basic science background in biochem, immunology, drug mechanisms, microbio nitty gritty, etc and none of that came up ONCE on the medicine floor.
On the flip side, I've yet to hear any good arguments in defense of the USMLE in it's current format and current role. It makes absolutely no sense that someone needs to beat 80% of others on that exam to become a specialized surgeon. And I've yet to see anything on rotations that would back up the idea that higher step 1 = better resident. If I had to try and pick who had the highest and lowest step1 scores out of the Hopkins residents Ive rotated with, I would be 100% guessing. Vast swaths of what I learned to score well was useless basic science background in biochem, immunology, drug mechanisms, microbio nitty gritty, etc and none of that came up ONCE on the medicine floor.
Wait is anyone taking Step 1 confidence intervals seriously? I thought they had little value from a practical sense because people are apparently ok in not being 95% confident when making decisions.
Since this thread was about MCAT vs USMLE, let me add the confidence interval information for the former:
"MCAT total scores are reported with a 68% confidence band of plus or minus two points, and MCAT section
scores are reported with 68% confidence bands of plus or minus one point. Adding and subtracting two
points to an MCAT total score of 500, for example, defines a confidence band that begins at 498 and goes
to 502. This means that in 68% of cases, the true score for an examinee with a reported score of 500 lies
within the band that goes from 498 to 502."
The 66% CI for the MCAT is plus or minus 2 points!!!
The same CI for the USMLE is plus or minus 8 points! With no ability to retake it.
So think about how often we see people retaking the MCAT to get a better score, and then think about how messed up it would be if it was 4x more volatile, and you had to live with the first one.
(The two are surprisingly comparable with both containing most of their curve in a 50-60 point range)
I agree with this assessment. I did better than you on the MCAT and worse on the USMLEs. The MCAT, particularly VR, had a lot of aptitude component you could reason your way through. There's plenty of people that, without dedicated studying, could pull off a 30 (~508) on the MCAT having just taken the prerequisites but not really having any dedicated study time. It's been 11 years, and I'm fairly certain if you gave me a couple weeks to review my physics formulas and my ochem I could probably pull off a respectable MCAT score even today.SAT is mostly thinking
LSAT is pure thinking
MCAT is in between USMLE and LSAT
USMLE is almost pure memorization
36 MCAT
247 step1
261 step2ck
I go down in percentile based on how memory heavy the exam is aka crystallized knowledge testing vs. fluid intelligence. Also, I liked old MCAT more since more quant thinking with physics. Now more verbal reasoning heavy. But I think hat is a good change. Med school has very little quant thinking
Make it more of an aptitude test or increase the sample size (e.g. a multi day 500 question exam).Is there a way to reduce the Step 1 CI and if so how?
Make it more of an aptitude test or increase the sample size (e.g. a multi day 500 question exam).
I suppose I just havent rotated with people at the bottom end of the curve for comparison, the recent average here was high 240s with a pretty narrow std dev. Maybe a 250 looks a lot better next to a 210. Similarly to match Big 4 you cant be at the bottom end.You need to beat 80% of others not because you need to score that high to be a surgeon, but because it’s the only standardized comparison PDs and use and the residency spots are so competitive. Same way high MCAT scores don’t mean you’ll be a great doctor but the elite schools sure seem to have really high MCAT averages. Step scores are literally the only standardized thing on a residency application.
You might not have seen it at Hopkins but students who score better, on average, are better students on the wards. I have seen this over and over again already in my first two months of rotations and it’s not just my anecdote, this sentiment is echoed time and time again by attendings and residents in multiple spheres. Good students are good students. This isn’t to say there aren’t people who do better once they hit the wards, but to deny there isn’t the general overall trend is disingenuous.
Arguments for the current model include it allows a direct comparison which allows students at schools not named Hopkins to show they can compete and perform just as well as the students at Hopkins, and Step 1 is taken early enough that if you don’t perform as well as you wanted you still have lots of time to consider your options. Getting rid of a scored Step 1 just means a different test will be created that will be taken much closer to applications, residency programs will select more for school prestige than they already do, and place more emphasis on things even more arbitrary and stupid than Step 1 like research, clinical grades, and EC junk.
Quintiles are the only reasonable option I’ve seen.
Credit where its due: the dozens of schools that have been switching preclinical to Pass/Fail are sparing thousands of students from years of unnecessary stress, gunning and misery. That was probably considered an outlandish change at the time it was first being proposed, too.Medicine will always be that rat race since around 70-80% of us are type A people... And the people in charge do not try to make things any better.
You need to beat 80% of others not because you need to score that high to be a surgeon, but because it’s the only standardized comparison PDs and use and the residency spots are so competitive. Same way high MCAT scores don’t mean you’ll be a great doctor but the elite schools sure seem to have really high MCAT averages. Step scores are literally the only standardized thing on a residency application.
You might not have seen it at Hopkins but students who score better, on average, are better students on the wards. I have seen this over and over again already in my first two months of rotations and it’s not just my anecdote, this sentiment is echoed time and time again by attendings and residents in multiple spheres. Good students are good students. This isn’t to say there aren’t people who do better once they hit the wards, but to deny there isn’t the general overall trend is disingenuous.
Arguments for the current model include it allows a direct comparison which allows students at schools not named Hopkins to show they can compete and perform just as well as the students at Hopkins, and Step 1 is taken early enough that if you don’t perform as well as you wanted you still have lots of time to consider your options. Getting rid of a scored Step 1 just means a different test will be created that will be taken much closer to applications, residency programs will select more for school prestige than they already do, and place more emphasis on things even more arbitrary and stupid than Step 1 like research, clinical grades, and EC junk.
Quintiles are the only reasonable option I’ve seen.
I suppose I just havent rotated with people at the bottom end of the curve for comparison, the recent average here was high 240s with a pretty narrow std dev. Maybe a 250 looks a lot better next to a 210. Similarly to match Big 4 you cant be at the bottom end.
So really what I know is that among my friends and peers and the people training me, suggesting a 255 will do better for their patients than a 240 is absolutely laughable. Yet, that has a huge impact on matching competitive specialties. Add into this that they could both be true 248s and one got a lot luckier, which happens 1/3rd of the time, and it looks to me like a system that absolutely cannot be allowed to continue in it's current form.
Agree that my favorite fix is a switch to big bins like quartiles.
Actually one of the major points brought up by the INCUS convention is that URM differences do continue to exist in the Step exams and residency match. One of the positive side effects of a pass/fail switch would be that way, way more minority med students would now stand a chance at surgical specialty matches.What is your metric for "better" on wards? If it's regurgitation of factoids to answer pimp questions then I would imagine there is a heavy correlation btw step scores and performance in this area. I'm vehemently against step going p/f for most of the reasons you've identified; it screws over students from lower tier schools (along with students who chose their state school for financial reasons). With that said, much like the mcat I don't think Step1 meaningfully identifies who will be a good doctor vs. not - there's just too many subjective qualities that factor in - but there's no way to rely solely on these qualities without leaving the door open to nepotism etc.
URM stats basically prove that beyond a certain point mcat/gpa can't identify meaningful differences in student performance in medical school and beyond. I imagine the same holds true for step; might be able to see it in 210 vs. 250 student, but can't imagine the you'd see it in 230-240-250 folk - especially once they have moved on to clinical practice.
Actually one of the major points brought up by the INCUS convention is that URM differences do continue to exist in the Step exams and residency match. One of the positive side effects of a pass/fail switch would be that way, way more minority med students would now stand a chance at surgical specialty matches.
Also, why does this conversation always pretend the USMLE has always been like this??? Go back to the 90s and nobody cared about your score, go back any further and the score literally doesn't exist. It's not like they had a hard time identifying highly competent students to fill desirable residency slots twenty years ago.