Characteristics Associated with Successful Residency Match in General Surgery.

Objective: To evaluate characteristics of matched and unmatched general surgery residency (GSR) applicants. Background: Given the recent change of the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 grading to pass/fail, understanding the factors that influence GSR match success is integral to identifying potential interventions to improve match rates for diverse medical students. Methods: Retrospective review of GSR National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) applicant and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) active resident data between 2011 and 2022. Data included application characteristics for United States ("US") and "independent" applicants, factors cited by program directors in the interview and ranking process, paths pursued if applicants went unmatched, and racial/ethnic representation. Results: A total of 9149 US and 3985 independent applicants applied to GSR between 2011 and 2021. Matched versus unmatched applicants had higher step 1 scores (US: 236 vs 218, P = 0.005; independent: 237 vs 228, P = 0.001), higher step 2 scores (US: 248 vs 232, P = 0.006; independent: 245 vs 234, P < 0.001), more likely to belong to alpha omega alpha (US: 17.1% vs 1.6%, P = 0.002) or to attend a top 40 National Institutes of Health-funded school (US: 31.0% vs 19.4%, P = 0.002) compared to unmatched applicants. Program directors heavily factored step 1 and step 2 scores, letters of recommendation, interactions with faculty and trainees, and interpersonal skills when interviewing and ranking applicants. The proportion of active general surgery residents versus applicants was lower for Asians (12.3% vs 20.9%, P < 0.001), Black/African American (5.0% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), Hispanic/Latino (5.0% vs 9.4%, P = 0.001), and underrepresented in medicine students (10.3% vs 19.1%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In the pass/fail step 1 era, factors including step 2 score and other subjective metrics may be more heavily weighted in the GSR match process.

How Do I Match? A Survey Study on the Impact of Step 1 Becoming Pass/Fail.

BACKGROUND: Step 1 has historically been a major criterion to evaluate students for residency match. With Step 1 now being pass/fail (P/F), students are uncertain how to distinguish their applications. We aim to understand student's opinions surrounding the scoring change as this is the first class of students applying to residency in the P/F era. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic survey was sent to 3rd and 4th year American medical students. RESULTS: Of the 255 students surveyed, 61.6% prefer Step 1 in the P/F format. Students applying for highly competitive specialties (HCS) preferred numerical scoring (55.6%). On a 5-point Likert scale, students entering HCS believed more strongly that they would have a better chance at matching if Step 1 was graded numerically (3.47 vs 2.71) and creates an unfair advantage for those who can afford to pursue a research year (3.46 vs 2.95). Students entering HCS felt finances played a significant role in whether they took a research year and felt added pressure to engage in research. Respondents believe that students from prestigious medical schools, well-connected students, and MD students will benefit most. CONCLUSIONS: While students mostly prefer P/F scoring, there were differences of opinion between those going into HCS and LCS. Students indicated that those who have financial means are at a distinct advantage as they can afford to utilize a research year to distinguish their applications. Future efforts should be made to address student concerns and unintended consequences of the scoring change to create an equitable system.

Impact of USMLE Pass/Fail Step 1 Scoring on Current Medical Students.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine students' perceptions of pass/fail scoring for Step 1, particularly when applying to competitive specialties. This study also investigated whether this transition increased anxiety among medical students and elicited student perspectives on the most critical components of residency applications. INTRODUCTION: The United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 Board Exam transitioned from a traditional numeric score to pass/fail for exams taken on or after January 26, 2022. One justification for this change, according to a statement from USMLE, was to ease the transition between undergraduate and graduate medical education. Although many factors are considered when selecting candidates to interview for residency, Step 1 scores were historically used as an important metric. Few studies specifically evaluated medical student's attitudes toward the change in Step 1 grading. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to Penn State College of Medicine medical students in the 2024 to 2027 classes. Statistical analysis was conducted on responses to research plans, attitudes regarding Step 1 pass/fail, match rates, and importance of application components. RESULTS: There was a 21.3% response rate (127/596) to the survey with 30.7% pursuing a competitive specialty. Students applying into competitive specialties felt their chances of matching changed significantly compared to students applying to other specialties (either increased (25.6% vs 10.2%, P < .001), or decreased (28.2% vs10.3%, P < .001). Majority of students (73.2%) agreed with the decision to make Step 1 pass/fail, however, students reported increased anxiety surrounding Step 2 scores. There was a significant association between which aspects students believed were most important for matching (letters of recommendation and performance on Acting Internships) and those they believed program directors would weigh heaviest (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Medical students report increased anxiety with Step 2 after Step 1 became pass/fail, although students overwhelmingly agreed with this change. To address this, medical schools should offer further guidance and resources to students, focusing on mentorship and methods to optimize residency applications for their chosen specialties.

The Effect of Numeric Versus Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Scores in the Integrated Plastic Surgery 2023-2024 Match Cycle: A Single Institution Study.

OBJECTIVE: The USMLE Step 1 exam, an important metric in the integrated plastic surgery match, transitioned to pass/fail scoring in January 2022. No previous studies have investigated the impact of this new scoring system on the process of ranking applicants in the integrated plastic surgery match. DESIGN: 330 Plastic Surgery Common Applications (PSCAs) were submitted to a single academic center in the 2023-2024 match cycle. Applicants were sorted into tiers via a holistic review process, and quantifiable data, including USMLE Step 1 scores, were then compared between tiers. SETTING: Our Institution's Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Program. PARTICIPANTS: Integrated Plastic Surgery applicants in the 2023-2024 match cycle. RESULTS: 317 of 330 PSCAs were analyzed in this study, excluding applicants who did an elective rotation at our institution. Applicants were sorted into 3 tiers: high (n = 100), middle (n = 118) and low (n = 99), with a significant difference in match rate per tier, respectively (88.0%, 58.5%, 30.3%, p < 0.0001). The majority of USMLE Step 1 scores were reported as pass/fail (186/317, 58.7%). There was a significant difference (p < 0.0001) between the average USMLE Step 1 score between the high (mean 250.5, SD 10.4), middle (mean 241, SD 14.6), and low tiers (mean 235.5, SD 16.5). More applicants in the low tier (50%) and high tier (40%) reported numeric USMLE Step 1 scores than those in the middle tier (35%, p = 0.0734). Stepwise logistic regression revealed USMLE Step 1 score to be an independent predictor of tier placement between the high and middle tier (p = 0.0030) and high and low tier (p = 0.0001). Lastly, 3 applicants reported their USMLE Step 1 score as 'pass' instead of their given numeric score. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing applicants with numeric USMLE Step 1 scores to those with pass/fail scores can have a significant impact on the ranking of those applicants and should be carefully considered during the plastic surgery match process.

Many Paths to the Summit: Survey of Step 1 Study Methods with Pass/Fail Scoring.

Introduction: After the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) shifted the Step 1 licensure exam to pass/fail, there have been limited studies to analyze changes in student study strategies. Material and Methods: Surveys were distributed to third- and fourth-year medical students at the University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS). The response rate was 66%. Results: The largest proportion (18.81%) of students chose 8 weeks of study time. 40.59% of students increased the length of their study period. To determine time allocated for dedicated study, 37.26% of respondents consulted near-peers who had already taken Step 1. Students also considered prior experiences with standardized tests (15.57%), personal reasons (14.62%), and conversations with school advisors (13.21%). 44.55% of students studied for 9-11 h a day, and 42.57% studied for 5-8 h a day. 52.69% of students scored between 70 and 80% on their final practice NBME test before their Step 1 exam. One hundred percent of respondents passed the exam. Exam non-extenders achieved higher end average practice test scores with shorter study periods. No differences in Step 1 study time or intensity were found when comparing students by intended specialty competitiveness. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated patterns in study strategies for the new pass/fail Step 1 exam that may prove useful for curriculum design and schedule plan for future cohorts. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02072-2.

The Correlation Between International Medical Graduates' Self-Study Habits and Their United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) Scores.

INTRODUCTION: To secure a residency in the United States, medical students must pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and Step 2 CK exams. This study examines the correlation between international medical graduates' (IMGs) self-study habits and their USMLE scores. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted with 51 anonymous third- and fourth-year IMGs from Saint James Medical School, IL, United States. Participants completed an online survey about their study habits and USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 CK scores. All participants were undergoing clinical clerkships at South Texas Health Hospitals in McAllen, TX. RESULTS: The highest mean Step 1 scores were 211.3 for completing ≥7,000 questions, 222.2 for 91-120 days of study, 209.2 for 76-100% time on practice questions, 229.7 for 16-19 hours/day of study, and 228.0 for 51-75% group study. The highest mean Step 2 CK scores were 241.0 for completing ≥6,000 questions, 239.8 for <30 days of study, 238.8 for 76-100% time on practice questions, 239.0 for 16-19 hours/day of study, and 237.5 for 26-50% group study. No significant relationship was found between study habits and passing Step 1 scores (p>0.05), but moderate correlations were found for completing ≥4,000 questions and 61-90 days of study. No significant relationship was found between study habits and the national average Step 2 CK score, but a strong correlation was found for 25-50% time on practice questions. CONCLUSION: While some study habits correlate with higher scores, no significant relationship was found between specific study habits and passing Step 1 or achieving the national average Step 2 CK score.

Evaluating the Factors Influencing Residency Match for Surgical Specialty Applicants and Programs: Challenges and Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: We aim to evaluate the impact of recent changes in the residency matching process on surgical specialties' applicants and programs to offer recommendations on residency selection and matching processes. METHODS: We utilized five databases while employing a Boolean query to search for studies from 2015 to March 2024. The search selection focused on factors and recent changes influencing residency match results across surgical specialties, including USMLE Step 1 pass/fail, research productivity, interview structure, and preference and geographic signaling. RESULTS: The shift of the USMLE Step 1 to a pass/fail scoring system revealed a consensus among surgical program directors (PDs) and applicants not in favor of the change due to the emphasis on additional application elements. Research productivity was identified as a significant factor, especially in neurosurgery (with an average of 18.3 publications per applicant) and vascular surgery (8.3 publications), indicating a positive correlation between the number of publications and match outcomes. The adoption of virtual interviews has been well-received by both applicants and PDs, leading to an increase in the number of interviews offered and applicants. The implementation of preference and geographic signaling mechanisms has improved interview rates for applicants who utilize them. CONCLUSION: The transition to a pass/fail USMLE Step 1 has raised concerns among surgical specialties, necessitating a greater focus on Step 2 scores and research productivity. Virtual interviews and signaling have improved the accessibility and reach of the residency application process, however, the full impact of these changes on the perception of applicant-program fit remains unclear.

In-depth analysis of ChatGPT's performance based on specific signaling words and phrases in the question stem of 2377 USMLE step 1 style questions.

ChatGPT has garnered attention as a multifaceted AI chatbot with potential applications in medicine. Despite intriguing preliminary findings in areas such as clinical management and patient education, there remains a substantial knowledge gap in comprehensively understanding the chances and limitations of ChatGPT's capabilities, especially in medical test-taking and education. A total of n = 2,729 USMLE Step 1 practice questions were extracted from the Amboss question bank. After excluding 352 image-based questions, a total of 2,377 text-based questions were further categorized and entered manually into ChatGPT, and its responses were recorded. ChatGPT's overall performance was analyzed based on question difficulty, category, and content with regards to specific signal words and phrases. ChatGPT achieved an overall accuracy rate of 55.8% in a total number of n = 2,377 USMLE Step 1 preparation questions obtained from the Amboss online question bank. It demonstrated a significant inverse correlation between question difficulty and performance with rs = -0.306; p < 0.001, maintaining comparable accuracy to the human user peer group across different levels of question difficulty. Notably, ChatGPT outperformed in serology-related questions (61.1% vs. 53.8%; p = 0.005) but struggled with ECG-related content (42.9% vs. 55.6%; p = 0.021). ChatGPT achieved statistically significant worse performances in pathophysiology-related question stems. (Signal phrase = "what is the most likely/probable cause"). ChatGPT performed consistent across various question categories and difficulty levels. These findings emphasize the need for further investigations to explore the potential and limitations of ChatGPT in medical examination and education.

Student Perspectives on the Undergraduate Medical Student Research Experience at a Single United States Allopathic Institution.

Introduction The purpose of this study was to identify student-reported institutional facilitators and barriers to successful research experiences at a single United States allopathic institution. Residency applications have increasingly become more competitive, and with the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 exam's transition to pass/fail, factors such as research experience and outcomes may become more important to increase residency application competitiveness. This study sought to explore factors that impact successful research experiences leading to tangible outcomes for medical students at our medical school, the Joe R. & Teresa Lozano Long School of Medicine. Methods  A cross-sectional survey was developed and administered via REDCap to 853 students in May 2022. Survey question domains included demographics, past and present research participation, perceived barriers/facilitators to research, tangible outcomes (e.g., publications and posters), and overall satisfaction with research comparing subjectively "best" and "worst" experiences. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) deemed this project as non-regulated research.  Results We had a 24% (n = 204/853) response rate. The responses were distributed equally among the four classes. A big portion of the participants (71%, n = 59/83) identified a tangible outcome as the most important measure of success. Regarding facilitators, students identified having a mentor (89%, n = 165/184) and departmental connections (85%, n = 156/184) as the most important when looking for a project. Barriers included SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound) lacking in 31% (n = 24/75) of worst projects, followed by a clear timeline in 29% (n = 22/76) and hours of commitment in 27% (n = 21/78). The best projects were more likely to have resulted in a publication (61% (27/44) vs. 32% (14/44)) or have a poster (64% (28/44) vs. 36% (16/44)). Conclusions Medical students are interested in participating in research, with important facilitators including mentorship and departmental connections. Modifiable variables include lack of clear timelines, well-defined roles and responsibilities, and time commitments. This information may be useful for faculty who mentor medical students or medical schools interested in designing medical student research programs.

Effect of Dentifrice Ingredients on Volume and Vitality of a Simulated Periodontal Multispecies Biofilm.

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of different toothpaste ingredients on biofilm volume and vitality in an established non-contact biofilm removal model. A multi-species biofilm comprising Porphyromonas gingivalis, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Fusobacterium nucleatum was grown on protein-coated titanium disks. Six disks per group were exposed to 4 seconds non-contact brushing using a sonic toothbrush. Four groups assessed slurries containing different ingredients, i.e., dexpanthenol (DP), peppermint oil (PO), cocamidopropyl betaine (CB), and sodium hydroxide (NaOH), one positive control group with the slurry of a toothpaste (POS), and a negative control group with physiological saline (NEG). Biofilm volume and vitality were measured using live-dead staining and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Statistical analysis comprised descriptive statistics and inter-group differences. In the test groups, lowest vitality and volume were found for CB (50.2 ± 11.9%) and PO (3.6 × 105 ± 1.8 × 105 µm3), respectively. Significant differences regarding biofilm vitality were found comparing CB and PO (p = 0.033), CB and NEG (p = 0.014), NaOH and NEG (p = 0.033), and POS and NEG (p = 0.037). However, no significant inter-group differences for biofilm volume were observed. These findings suggest that CB as a toothpaste ingredient had a considerable impact on biofilm vitality even in a non-contact brushing setting, while no considerable impact on biofilm volume was found.

Gender differences in learning and study strategies impact medical students' preclinical and USMLE step 1 examination performance.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of students' learning strategies can enhance academic support. Few studies have investigated differences in learning strategies between male and female students as well as their impact on United States Medical Licensing Examination® (USMLE) Step 1 and preclinical performance. METHODS: The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) was administered to the classes of 2019-2024 (female (n = 350) and male (n = 262)). Students' performance on preclinical first-year (M1) courses, preclinical second-year (M2) courses, and USMLE Step 1 was recorded. An independent t-test evaluated differences between females and males on each LASSI scale. A Pearson product moment correlation determined which LASSI scales correlated with preclinical performance and USMLE Step 1 examinations. RESULTS: Of the 10 LASSI scales, Anxiety, Attention, Information Processing, Selecting Main Idea, Test Strategies and Using Academic Resources showed significant differences between genders. Females reported higher levels of Anxiety (p < 0.001), which significantly influenced their performance. While males and females scored similarly in Concentration, Motivation, and Time Management, these scales were significant predictors of performance variation in females. Test Strategies was the largest contributor to performance variation for all students, regardless of gender. CONCLUSION: Gender differences in learning influence performance on STEP1. Consideration of this study's results will allow for targeted interventions for academic success.

Exploring the usage of learning resources by medical students in the basic science stage and their effect on academic performance.

BACKGROUND: The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 is one of the two examinations written after completion of the first two years (basic science stage) of medical school to be eligible to apply for residency training in the USA. A huge number and types of study materials are available to prepare for the exam which might confuse students choosing a resource. We investigated learning resources being used by the third and fifth-semester medical students and their association with academic performance. We also compared learning resources and exam scores of high-performing and low-performing students. METHODS: Data collection was done using structured (quantitative study) and semi-structured (qualitative study) questionnaires during a face-to-face interview. This article is about the quantitative part which was designed as a correlational study. Single factor one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson correlation coefficient test, T-test, and Fisher's exact test were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: About half of all students used three or more commercial resources dealing with the same content. A weak negative correlation was observed between the number of commercial resources and the exam scores, especially when the number of these resources was three or more (r = -0.26). The mean exam score of textbook users was statistically significantly higher than the mean score of textbook non-users (p = 0.01). The usage of textbooks was statistically significantly higher in the cohort of top performers in comparison to the rest of the students (p = 0.006). In addition to less usage of textbooks, the mean number of review books was higher in the group of weakest students (2.84 versus 3.7; p = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Most students did not use professional textbooks and about half used too many commercial review resources. While the former fact was significantly associated with poor academic performance, the later fact had weak negative correlation with exam score. Pedagogical interventions are urgently needed to make the right type of learning resources available by making professional textbooks more USMLE-oriented and helping the students choose the best and right number of resources for optimum academic performance. By fulfilling the observed needs of the students in this way, they might feel empowered because of self-determination which will motivate studies.

The Impact of United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Transitioning To Pass/Fail on Medical Student Perception of Research Needed to Match Into One's Preferred Specialty.

Purpose To evaluate how the transition of United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 to a pass/fail scoring influenced medical student perceptions of the importance of research required to match into their preferred residency specialty. Methods A 14-item survey was distributed by e-mail to medical students at one medical school in the southeastern United States in November of 2021. Responses were compared between medical students taking USMLE Step 1 pass/fail in the future and medical students taking USMLE Step 1 for a three-digit score. Results A total of 168 medical students responded to the survey with 98 respondents who planned on taking USMLE Step 1 pass/fail (45 first-year medical students (MS1) and 53 MS2) and 70 respondents who took USMLE Step 1 for a numerical score (37 MS3 and 33 MS4). There were no differences in how each cohort scored the level of importance of research in matching into their preferred residency specialty (p=0.10); however, those taking USMLE Step 1 pass/fail believe an average of 4.6 research experiences are necessary to match into their preferred residency, compared to only 3.4 research experiences for those who took it for a numerical score (p=0.04). Conclusion No statistically significant difference in the perceived importance of research in matching into one's preferred residency specialty was found between cohorts. However, the pass/fail cohort believes they will need more research experiences to match their chosen specialty than the numerical score cohort. Results could indicate that students participate in more research and extracurricular activities to be more competitive for residency applications.

Intrinsic capacity assessment using World Health Organization Integrated Care for Older People Step 1, and the association with frailty in community dwelling older adults.

AIM: This study aimed to investigate the association between intrinsic capacity (IC) and frailty in community-dwelling older adults. Specifically, we examined the utility of the World Health Organization's Integrated Care for Older People Step 1 screen for identifying frail older persons in the community. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of a community frailty screening initiative. IC loss was ascertained using the World Health Organization's Integrated Care for Older People Step 1 questions. The Clinical Frailty Scale was used to categorize participants as robust (Clinical Frailty Scale S1-3) or frail (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥4). Logistic regression was used to analyze the association of individual and cumulative IC losses with frailty, adjusting for confounders. Additionally, the diagnostic performance of using cumulative IC losses to identify frailty was assessed. RESULTS: This study included 1164 participants (28.2% frail). Loss in locomotion (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.47, 95% CI 1.07-2.02), vitality (AOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.39), sensory (AOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.51-2.64) and psychological capacities (AOR 1.92, 95% CI 1.45-2.56) were significantly associated with frailty. Loss in more than three IC domains was associated with frailty. Using loss in at least three ICs identifies frailty, with sensitivity of 38.6%, specificity of 83.5% and positive predictive value of 47.4%. Using loss in at least four ICs improved specificity to 96.9%, and is associated with the highest positive predictive value of 57.6% and highest positive likelihood ratio of 3.55 for frailty among all cut-off values. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.64 (95% CI 0.61-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: IC loss as identified through World Health Organization's Integrated Care for Older People Step 1 is associated with frailty community-dwelling older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2024; 24: 457-463.

ChatGPT-4 Performance on USMLE Step 1 Style Questions and Its Implications for Medical Education: A Comparative Study Across Systems and Disciplines.

We assessed the performance of OpenAI's ChatGPT-4 on United States Medical Licensing Exam STEP 1 style questions across the systems and disciplines appearing on the examination. ChatGPT-4 answered 86% of the 1300 questions accurately, exceeding the estimated passing score of 60% with no significant differences in performance across clinical domains. Findings demonstrated an improvement over earlier models as well as consistent performance in topics ranging from complex biological processes to ethical considerations in patient care. Its proficiency provides support for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) as an interactive learning tool and furthermore raises questions about how the technology can be used to educate students in the preclinical component of their medical education. The authors provide an example and discuss how students can leverage AI to receive real-time analogies and explanations tailored to their desired level of education. An appropriate application of this technology potentially enables enhancement of learning outcomes for medical students in the preclinical component of their education.

Trends in the Main Residency Match From 2007 to 2020.

Background The United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 was recently changed from a numerically scored grading system to a pass/fail grading system. Until late 2024, there will be no formal studies about the impact that the grading change will have on the match process. To thoroughly assess the impact that this change will have on the overall match process, it is important to look at what the trends in applicants' objective measures have been in the years before the change. We aim to systematically evaluate the rates of change and mean trend of objective metrics found in residency applications in the main residency match.  Methods Objective medical student data of matched and unmatched applicants were queried from the National Matching Program's Charting Outcomes in the Match Reports for the 2007 to 2020 application cycles. Data were used to create linear regression analyses and statistical tests were performed to evaluate trends over time. Results For matched applicants, there were statistically significant positive trends for the mean number of contiguous ranks (m=0.33, p<0.01), having another non-doctoral graduate degree (m=0.67, p<0.01), membership to Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) honor society (m=0.22, p<0.01), mean USMLE Step 1 score (m=1.01, p<0.01), mean USMLE Step 2 score (m=1.68, p<0.01), mean number of research experiences (m=0.12, p<0.01), and mean number of abstracts, presentations, and publications (m=0.34, p<0.01). Additionally, there was a statistically significant negative trend for the percentage who graduated from a top 40 National Institutes of Health-funded medical school (m=-0.41, p<0.01). For unmatched applicants, there were statistically significant positive trends for having another non-doctoral graduate degree (m=0.83, p<0.01), mean USMLE Step 1 score (m=1.26, p<0.01), mean USMLE Step 2 score (m=2.27, p<0.01), mean number of research experiences (m=0.13, p<0.01), and mean number of abstracts, presentations, and publications (m=0.33, p<0.01). Conclusion Our study shows that there have been statistically significant increases in almost all objective measures in the residency application. Recent changes to the abstracts, presentations, and publications on the Step 1 scoring system will force almost all residency programs to overhaul their application process and potentially increase reliance on Step 2, research, and other nonobjective factors. For students early in their medical education, emphasis on Step 2 and research will yield increased chances of matching into residency in the future.

Medical student non-modifiable risk factors and USMLE Step 1 exam score.

For diversity to exist in the medical graduate workforce, students from all backgrounds should have equitable opportunities of employment. Specialties have utilized a minimal threshold for USMLE Step 1 score when screening applicants for residency interviews. The OHSU SOM class of 2021 completed a 14-question voluntary survey on their Step 1 score and the following non-modifiable risk factors: Adverse Childhood Experience score (ACEs), sex, gender, Underrepresented in Medicine status (URiM), family income during adolescence, highest degree held by a guardian, discrimination experience during medical school, federal/state assistance use, and rural versus urban primary home. Descriptive statistics and unadjusted risk ratios were applied to study the relation between Step 1 score and non-modifiable risk factors as well as certain non-modifiable risk factors and ACEs ≥ 3. The mean Step 1 score was 230 (213, 247). Of the students, 28.2% identified ACEs ≥ 3, 13.6% were considered URiM, and 65.4% were female. URiM were 2.34 (1.30, 4.23),females were 2.77 (1.06-7.29), and those who experienced discrimination in medical school were 4.25 (1.85, 9.77) times more likely to have ACEs ≥ 3. Students who had ACEs ≥ 3 were 3.58 (1.75, 7.29) times less likely to meet a minimal threshold for residency interviews of 220. These are the first results to demonstrate a relationship between Step 1 score and ACEs. Those who identified as URiM, females, and those who experienced discrimination in medical school were at a higher risk of ACEs of ≥ 3. Step 1 transitioned to pass/fail in January 2022. However, the first application cycle that residencies will see pass/fail scoring is 2023-2024, and fellowships will continue to see scored Step 1 until, at the earliest, the 2026-2027 application cycle. These data contribute to a foundation of research that could apply to Step 2CK testing scores, and help to inform decisions about the diversity and equity of the residency interview process.

The unified state qualification exam STEP-1 as a marker of the success of the education of pediatric doctors in Ukraine and Bogomolets National Medical University.

BACKGROUND: Ukraine's higher medical education goes deeper and deeper every year in the European integration processes in the field of «Health Care¼ knowledge. Since 2005, the integrated license integrated exam STEP "General medical training" has been introduced in the country to diagnose the quality of training of specialists in all medical specialties. Since 2019, Ukraine, unlike other countries in Europe and the world, has been training specialists in the specialty "Pediatrics" at the stage of undergraduate training. The quality control of the training of specialists is carried out in the form of passing the Unified State Qualification Exam STEP (USQE STEP) separately for each medical specialty (Medicine and Pediatrics). Therefore, the purpose of our research is to conduct a comparative analysis of the results of the success of the first stage of the USQE STEP-1 by students of higher medical education in the specialty "Pediatrics" with the specialty "Medicine" in Ukraine and in the Bogomolets National Medical University (Bogomolets NMU). METHODS: Analytical references to the results of the first stage of the USQE STEP-1 for the students who have completed theoretical medical disciplines specialty "Pediatrics" and the specialty "Medicine" in Ukraine and Bogomolets NMU, which are provided by the Testing Center at the Ministry of Health of Ukraine. Тhe statistical significance of comparative indicators was proved using Fisher's test, with a statistical error that corresponded to the specified value for ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: It is shown that in 2022, applicants of higher medical education of Ukraine with the specialty "Pediatrics" improved the overall success rate by 8.4%, and the success rate of subtests by an average of 10.5%, despite the state of war in Ukraine. The exception was the results of the licensing exam for the subtest component "Biochemistry": compared to 2021, the pass rate decreased by 3.6% in the specialty "Medicine" and by 6.4% in the specialty "Pediatrics". At Bogomolets NMU, the leaders of 2022 were the students of the "Pediatrics" specialty, their success rate is 2% higher than that of the "Medicine" specialty. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of the results of USQE STEP-1 by applicants of higher medical education of the specialties "Pediatrics" and "Medicine" in Ukraine showed the effectiveness of the selection of the specialty "Pediatrics" into a separate section of the training of specialists at the undergraduate level in the field of "Health Care". Using the methods of mathematical statistics, the effectiveness of organizational methodological techniques in the organization of the educational process in the conditions of the martial law of Ukraine and Bogomolets NMU as a leader in the training of specialists in Pediatric doctors has been proved.

Perceptions and Expectations Regarding the Step 1 Score Change Among Surgical and Non-Surgical Program Directors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

There are currently no studies examining differences in perceptions and expected impact of the Step 1 score change to pass/fail between surgical and non-surgical program directors (PDs). We conducted a systematic review in May 2023 of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PSYCInfo to evaluate studies examining PDs' perspectives regarding the Step 1 score change. We performed random-effects meta-analyses to determine differences in perspectives among surgical and non-surgical PDs. Surgical PDs (76.8% [95% CI, 72.1%-82.0%], I2 = 52%) reported significantly greater rates of disagreement with the score change compared to non-surgical (65.1% [95% CI, 57.9%-73.1%], I2 = 69.7%) (P = .01). Surgical PDs also reported significantly greater rates of agreement that the score change will increase the difficulty in objectively comparing applicants (88.1% [95% CI, 84.6%-91.7%], I2 = 16.4%), compared to non-surgical (81.0% [95% CI, 75.6%-86.8%], I2 = 72.6%) (P = .04). There was less heterogeneity among non-surgical PDs (88.7% [95% CI, 86.2%-91.2%], I2 = 0%), compared to surgical (84.7% [95% CI, 79.0%-90.8%], I2 = 67.3%), regarding expected increases in emphasis on Step 2, although the difference in rates of agreement was not statistically significant. Overall, there is significant heterogeneity in the literature regarding expected changes in the residency application review process. Most PDs reported significant disagreement with the score change, greater expected difficulty in objectively evaluating applicants, and greater emphasis on Step 2, with surgical PDs reporting greater rates of disagreement, greater expected difficulty, and heterogeneity regarding expected increases in emphasis on Step 2, compared to non-surgical. Additionally, there is significant heterogeneity in the overall literature regarding expected changes in the residency application review process. Further research is needed to establish evidence-based guidelines that improve the overall residency application process for all stakeholders.

Stair-Fall Risk Parameters in a Controlled Gait Laboratory Environment and Real (Domestic) Houses: A Prospective Study in Faller and Non-Faller Groups.

BACKGROUND: Falling on stairs is a major health hazard for older people. Risk factors for stair falls have been identified, but these are mostly examined in controlled biomechanics/gait laboratory environments, on experimental stairs with a given set of step dimensions. It remains unknown whether the conclusions drawn from these controlled environments would apply to the negotiation of other domestic staircases with different dimensions in real houses where people live. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to investigate whether selected biomechanical stepping behavior determined through stair gait parameters such as foot clearance, foot contact length and cadence are maintained when the staircase dimensions are different in real houses. METHODS: Twenty-five older adults (>65 years) walked on a custom-made seven-step laboratory staircase. Older adults were classified into two groups (fallers and non-fallers) based on recent fall history. Among the 25 participants, 13 people had at least one fall, trip, or slip in the last six months and they were assigned to the fallers group; 12 people did not experience any fall in the last six months, so they were assigned to the non-fallers group. In addition, these participants walked on the stairs in three different real exemplar houses wearing a novel instrumented shoe sensor system that could measure the above stair gait parameters. MATLAB was used to extract fall risk parameters from the collected data. One-way ANOVA was used to compare fall risk parameters on the different staircases. In addition, the laboratory-based fall risk parameters were compared to those derived from the real house stairs. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in selected stair-fall biomechanical risk factors among the house and laboratory staircases. The fall risk group comparisons suggest that high-risk fallers implemented a biomechanically riskier strategy that could increase overall falling risk. CONCLUSIONS: The significant differences due to the main effects of the fallers and non-fallers groups were obtained. For example, when ascending, the fallers group had less foot clearance on the entry (p = 0.016) and middle steps (p = 0.003); in addition, they had more foot clearance variability on the entry steps (p = 0.003). This suggests that the fallers group in this present study did not adopt more conservative stepping strategies during stair ascent compared to low-risk older adults. By showing less foot clearance and more variability in foot clearance, the risk for a trip would be increased.