» Articles » PMID: 21099388

Are United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 and 2 Scores Valid Measures for Postgraduate Medical Residency Selection Decisions?

Overview
Journal Acad Med
Specialty Medical Education
Date 2010 Nov 25
PMID 21099388
Citations 53
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores are frequently used by residency program directors when evaluating applicants. The objectives of this report are to study the chain of reasoning and evidence that underlies the use of USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores for postgraduate medical resident selection decisions and to evaluate the validity argument about the utility of USMLE scores for this purpose.

Method: This is a research synthesis using the critical review approach. The study first describes the chain of reasoning that underlies a validity argument about using test scores for a specific purpose. It continues by summarizing correlations of USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores and reliable measures of clinical skill acquisition drawn from nine studies involving 393 medical learners from 2005 to 2010. The integrity of the validity argument about using USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores for postgraduate residency selection decisions is tested.

Results: The research synthesis shows that USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores are not correlated with reliable measures of medical students', residents', and fellows' clinical skill acquisition.

Conclusions: The validity argument about using USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores for postgraduate residency selection decisions is neither structured, coherent, nor evidence based. The USMLE score validity argument breaks down on grounds of extrapolation and decision/interpretation because the scores are not associated with measures of clinical skill acquisition among advanced medical students, residents, and subspecialty fellows. Continued use of USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores for postgraduate medical residency selection decisions is discouraged.

Citing Articles

Almanac - Retrieval-Augmented Language Models for Clinical Medicine.

Zakka C, Shad R, Chaurasia A, Dalal A, Kim J, Moor M NEJM AI. 2024; 1(2).

PMID: 38343631 PMC: 10857783. DOI: 10.1056/aioa2300068.


Harnessing the potential of large language models in medical education: promise and pitfalls.

Benitez T, Xu Y, Boudreau J, Kow A, Bello F, Van Phuoc L J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024; 31(3):776-783.

PMID: 38269644 PMC: 10873781. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocad252.


No Medical Student Left Behind: A Study to Examine the Effects of Structured Step 1 Support within our Curriculum.

Sachs A, Barker B, Mihalic A, Sendelbach D, Wortham C, Rege R MedEdPublish (2016). 2023; 8:171.

PMID: 38089345 PMC: 10712451. DOI: 10.15694/mep.2019.000171.1.


A Call to Improve Conditions for Conducting Holistic Review in Graduate Medical Education Recruitment.

Williams C, Kwan B, Pereira A, Moody E, Angus S, El-Bayoumi J MedEdPublish (2016). 2023; 8:76.

PMID: 38089319 PMC: 10712609. DOI: 10.15694/mep.2019.000076.1.


Making progress on identifying those who aren't making progress: Using situational judgment tests to predict those at risk for remediation and attrition.

Gardner A, Dunkin B MedEdPublish (2016). 2023; 7:275.

PMID: 38089233 PMC: 10711960. DOI: 10.15694/mep.2018.0000275.1.