Written Boards Over...

[I Surgeon]

I'm glad it is over. I felt it was hard and questions not that clinically relevant.👎

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MstaKing10]

Haven't felt that bad after a test since OKAPS first year! Overall pretty similar but some pretty tough questions. I disagree about the test not being clinical in that there were a lot of "best management for X condition" questions but certainly lots of path and basic science type questions.

Best of luck to all that took it this year, and hopefully to moving on to the orals next year!!!

ps..I HATE OPTICS!!!

 

[I Surgeon]

Haven't felt that bad after a test since OKAPS first year! Overall pretty similar but some pretty tough questions. I disagree about the test not being clinical in that there were a lot of "best management for X condition" questions but certainly lots of path and basic science type questions.

Best of luck to all that took it this year, and hopefully to moving on to the orals next year!!!

ps..I HATE OPTICS!!!

yea, i meant not as many common clinical diseases you would see daily in clinic (unlike OCP).

 

[PCR]

When do we find out the results?

 

[monkey7247]

When do we find out the results?

8 weeks.

I agree that the questions were not clinically relevant. Even being a cornea fellow, I thought a lot of the cornea questions were hard.

 

[Pastrami King]

I'm signing up for a root canal to see if indeed that would be more fun.
Glad to know I wasn't the only one banging his/her head against the wall before/during/after.

 

[echinoderm]

how does it compare to OKAPs?

 

[Visionary]

how does it compare to OKAPs?

I found it to be fairly similar, though more clinically oriented. Still a good share of minutiae. Felt about the same after the WQE as the OKAP, and ended up with about the same score.

 

[MstaKing10]

Very similar to OKAPS style although slightly less basic science and no medicine questions. Lots of nit picky questions but that's what you would expect. I hope I get a similar score to my OKAPS and pass this thing!

 

[200UL]

I feel the boards was very similar to the OKAPS when I took it. People talk about it being "more clinical." I found the same minutiae. Perhaps the optics portions was a little more clinical....

I have heard the OKAPS/boards were once the same test. Then it changed. To me they have now morphed into a similar test again.

In other words, I believe the boards will continue to be made up with very detailed questions. If they asked "big concept" questions, we would all ace it. They need to spread us out somehow.

Study hard. Study the same material as you studied for the OKAPS. Remember 30% of test takers fail. Your best chance is to pass it your first time.

 

[Pastrami King]

The goal of the ABO and ophthalmology residency programs SHOULD be for everyone to ace it! There should be nothing wrong with 90% or even 100% of graduates passing the written boards - if they are well prepared - and the ABO and residencies should celebrate such a banner year. The test should really be a test of clinical competence and safety. I doubt that anyone would argue that the test comprises the 250 most important questions in ophthalmology.

Of course 30% of examinees x $1650 a pop is a hard cash cow to give up.

I feel the boards was very similar to the OKAPS when I took it. People talk about it being "more clinical." I found the same minutiae. Perhaps the optics portions was a little more clinical....

I have heard the OKAPS/boards were once the same test. Then it changed. To me they have now morphed into a similar test again.

In other words, I believe the boards will continue to be made up with very detailed questions. If they asked "big concept" questions, we would all ace it. They need to spread us out somehow.

Study hard. Study the same material as you studied for the OKAPS. Remember 30% of test takers fail. Your best chance is to pass it your first time.

 

[odieoh]

The goal of the ABO and ophthalmology residency programs SHOULD be for everyone to ace it! There should be nothing wrong with 90% or even 100% of graduates passing the written boards - if they are well prepared - and the ABO and residencies should celebrate such a banner year. The test should really be a test of clinical competence and safety. I doubt that anyone would argue that the test comprises the 250 most important questions in ophthalmology.

Of course 30% of examinees x $1650 a pop is a hard cash cow to give up.

That is/should be the goal of all residency programs. It is not and should not be a goal of the ABO. The goal of the ABO is to ensure competency. If it so happens that everyone is comptetent, that would be fantastic, however saying that it is a goal of the testing organization to have everyone pass would corrupt their objectivity as test writers/givers.

I happen to agree that a system that by default fails a certain % of test takers regardless of score is somewhat suspect. The scenario we all wonder about would be what if everyone got 90%+ of the questions right, and the people in the 90-92% range got failed because they were in the bottom percentiles. That would be horrible. Fortunately the reality is that the bottom percentile of the writtens is usually significantly worse than the rest.

I really don't think its organized as a way for them to make money. I certainly wouldn't call it a cash cow. Its a fair chunk of change but they do have expenses involved in writing, distributing and grading the tests. And the number of those that fail is pretty small relative to other big tests like steps 1-3 of the medical boards.

 

[200UL]

I understand the sentiment of the above post, but the test is not a money maker for anyone – I am surprised they can offer it at the price they do. For crying out loud, the orals are taken in the hotel room of the examiners.

I don't believe the ABO sets out to fail 30% each year on the writtens. The number fluctuates a fair amount.

I personally like it that a significant number of people struggle - why create a test where everyone passes? There would be no reason to take the test.

Finally, becoming ABO certified means A LOT. To be eligible for it, one must complete a lot of steps. It will always distinguish us from optometric "surgeons" (back door, take the easy road, less qualified doctors with less training).

On a side note - I would pay BIG MONEY to watch Ben Gaddie, OD take the ophthalmology oral boards. While his ignorance about the eye and ability to lie with a smile plays well on the local talk shows in Kentucky, the ABO members would not find his lack of knowledge and arrogance super cute. I am not sure why, but I believe it would be entertaining.

 

[Mirror Form]

I don't believe the ABO sets out to fail 30% each year on the writtens. The number fluctuates a fair amount.

Of course they do. The reason the percentage of failures fluctuates is b/c the distribution is not always perfectly guassian. Minutia frequently appears on the test because it's necessary to spread out the distribution.

I don't completely disagree with percent of failures on the written. A curve is the only possible way to make the results "fair" from year to year. But I really don't think the orals should have a 20+ percent failure rate. The MOC's are ******ed, and those do actually make me suspect they're just around to generate money+power.

I might find this less annoying if not for the fact that while ophthalmologists are spending thousands of dollars to take board's that are based on minutia, the optometrists are spending that money to lobby for expansion of scope. Nobody outside of ophthalmology has any clue how difficult our boards are, or whether optometrists could pass them.

 

[Perzian]

Has anyone else heard that we can log-on to the ABO website after a certain date and if we have passed, it should say "eligible" under the Oral exam section on the website... ?

Anyone know how long this took for the previous years?

Thanks

 

[Visionary]

Has anyone else heard that we can log-on to the ABO website after a certain date and if we have passed, it should say "eligible" under the Oral exam section on the website... ?

Anyone know how long this took for the previous years?

Thanks

Yes, but this notification only precedes receipt of the mailed results by a few days at most (I know, it can seem like an eternity). It's usually 6-8 weeks after the exam date. However, there was a problem with the web update last year, and a lot of folks who checked the website (at least for orals) got the impression they had failed. That's added stress you don't need!

 

[200UL]

Of course they do. The reason the percentage of failures fluctuates is b/c the distribution is not always perfectly guassian. Minutia frequently appears on the test because it's necessary to spread out the distribution.

I don't completely disagree with percent of failures on the written. A curve is the only possible way to make the results "fair" from year to year. But I really don't think the orals should have a 20+ percent failure rate. The MOC's are ******ed, and those do actually make me suspect they're just around to generate money+power.

I might find this less annoying if not for the fact that while ophthalmologists are spending thousands of dollars to take board's that are based on minutia, the optometrists are spending that money to lobby for expansion of scope. Nobody outside of ophthalmology has any clue how difficult our boards are, or whether optometrists could pass them.

Mirror Form. I find your post funny because it is so true.
Sometimes in medicine we are always so righteous. I agree that it is more challenging (financially/training wise) to become an ophthalmologist today compared with years prior. Optometry has taken the opposite approach and they have had significant success. I would venture to say that optometry has taken the “wall street” path to eye training – spend money to buy credentials/power – there is no need to prove competence in such a system.

Ophthalmology continues to move in a direction where experience and training buys credentials. Our path is probably the right path, but it is very frustrating to watch money buy the same thing we had to work for. Even if we cannot educate the public / lawmakers on this fact, I am happy our profession is trying to do the right thing.

 

[GAA]

Results available at the ABO website, good luck.

 

[Shnurek]

`