I don't wanna sound mean, but you seem to have a major love for these kinda charts and such.
It doesn't sound mean at all. I don't understand why you think it's perjorative.
If you were to discuss this topic with a few PD's, I think you'd find that we can confidently dismiss causality from the correlation you're pointing out.
Though it appears you can buy an extra 5% chance of matching with those additional 10 pts on step 1, what's more likely happening is that students who score 260+ tend to have better grades & CVs than those who score 250.
Most PDs that I've interacted with in competitive surgical specialties utilize step 1 cut-offs when granting interviews, so it's not analogous to how the MCAT is viewed in medical school admissions. No data to back this up, its purely anecdotal. Ask around though, you will find this is true.
There are plenty of people in hyper-competitive specialties at MGH/Hopkins/Mayo/UCSF with step 1 <250. Networking will pay off more than an additional 10 pts on step 1, especially in small fields. Put another way, a phone call from an influential mentor may get you ranked, while both 270 and 250 will only get you interviews.
I do share your belief that cut-offs are used for
granting interviews but ranking applicants to match is another question. The annual
PD surveys suggest that many programs 1) use Step 1 cutoffs for interviews, AND 2) value Step 1 scores relatively highly (albeit not the most important) when ranking applicants to match. Are you going to tell me that they use a HIGHER cutoff to rank to match? That would not make any sense.
I also share your belief that networking and personal calls are highly influential. However, the issue really is, What is the time cost-efficacy of trying to network and finding a mentor vs. preparing for Step 1? What if becoming buds with a highly influential mentor turns out to be more difficult/less likely than getting a 270?
I also share your belief that there will be high correlation between the top Step 1 scorers and the top grades+CVs. The question is, are you going to strive to be one of those people? Or will you be content with an ordinary score and justify that with having devoted extraordinary effort onto other endeavors? If so, do you believe that the 5% boost for 260s over 250s is solely attributed to other factors (grades+CV), and that an incrementally higher Step 1 score, everything else being equal, will not have ANY positive effect on your match chances?
In addition, these charts do not show error bars so we have no idea what the distribution is like for each score. Finally, the sample size decreases significantly at these higher scores such that we can extract less and less meaningful information from them.
Good point. Here are some error bars from the
Ophthalmology match (3435 students over 5 years). (I added the extra lines.)
I see that, as far as matching anywhere goes, a 270 is not statistically significantly different from a 258 or so.
So, shoot for a 260? Anything above that is just gravy? I mean,
anecdotally, that'll put you squarely in the average range of a few of the most competitive programs.