Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Editorial
. 2020 Jan 8;30(1):565-567.
doi: 10.1007/s40670-019-00906-y. eCollection 2020 Mar.

Stepping Back: Re-evaluating the Use of the Numeric Score in USMLE Examinations

Affiliations
Editorial

Stepping Back: Re-evaluating the Use of the Numeric Score in USMLE Examinations

Paul George et al. Med Sci Educ. .

Abstract

There are increasing concerns from medical educators about students' over-emphasis on preparing for a high-stakes licensing examination during medical school, especially the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. Residency program directors' use of the numeric score (otherwise known as the three-digit score) on Step 1 to screen and select applicants drive these concerns. Since the USMLE was not designed as a residency selection tool, the use of numeric scores for this purpose is often referred to as a secondary and unintended use of the USMLE score. Educators and students are concerned about USMLE's potentially negative influence on curricular innovation and the role of high-stakes examinations in student and trainee well-being. Changing the score reporting of the examinations from a numeric score to pass/fail has been suggested by some. This commentary first reviews the primary use and secondary uses of the USMLE scores. We then focus on the advantages and disadvantages of the currently reported numeric score using Messick's conceptualization of construct validity as our framework. Finally, we propose a path forward to design a comprehensive, more holistic review of residency candidates.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of InterestOn behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

    1. National Resident Matching Program, Data Release, and Research Committee: Results of the 2018 NRMP program director survey. National Resident Matching Program, Washington, DC. 2018. https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018 /07/NRMP-2018-Program-Direc.... .
    1. Moynahan KF. The current use of United States medical licensing examination step 1 scores: holistic admissions and student well-being are in the balance. Acad Med. 2018;93(7):963–965. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002101. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zaidi NLB, Kreiter CD, Castaneda PR, Schiller JH, Yang J, Grum CM, Hammoud MM, Gruppen LD, Santen SA. Generalizability of competency assessment scores across and within clerkships: how students, assessors, and clerkships matter. Acad Med. 2018;93(8):1212–1217. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002262. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Messick S. Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educ Meas Issues Pract. 1995;14(4):5–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1995.tb00881.x. - DOI
    1. Norcini JJ, Boulet JR, Opalek A, Dauphinee WD. The relationship between licensing examination performance and the outcomes of care by international medical school graduates. Acad Med. 2014;89(8):1157–1162. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000310. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources