Medical College Admission Test Scores Research Articles

Impact of Masking Academic Metrics on Enrolling a Broadly Diverse and Mission-Aligned Student Body.

The June 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning affirmative action required medical schools to discontinue considering race/ethnicity in admissions decisions. Medical schools must now identify different strategies if they aim to recruit and admit applicants from groups underrepresented in medicine (URiM; race/ethnicity), as enrolling broadly diverse students remains critical for serving the U.S. population. Washington State University Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine (established in 2015) has an admissions process that assesses academic metrics using national threshold combinations of undergraduate grade point averages (UGPAs) and Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores (published on school's website), and legal residency in or ties to Washington state, as prescreening criteria for secondary applications. UGPAs and MCAT scores are then masked from further consideration, allowing for decisions to be made with a focus on mission-aligned criteria, such as certain personal attributes and lived experiences and coming from specific environments (i.e., educationally or socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, rural communities, military service, or a member of a federally recognized Tribe). In the last 5 admissions cycles (enrollment years 2018-2022), cohort data demonstrates that as the admissions funnel narrows and each subsequent pool is smaller than the preceding one, the representation of mission-aligned applicants increases, despite the masking of academic metrics. The most recently enrolled class (enrollment year 2022) of 80 had 14 (17.5%) URiM students, closely mirroring the state's general population. The overall yield (acceptance:matriculation) has steadily improved with the last 2 cycles to 1.68:1 and 1.65:1, indicating slightly more than 1.5 times the number of offers needed to fill the class are being made. Next steps include further refining the process by considering more granular data on applicants' childhood community characteristics and rural background and examining how admissions data may correlate with residency and practice location and communities served.

Association of applicant demographic factors with medical school acceptance

BackgroundMedical school acceptance rates in the United States (US) have been lower for applicants who identify as Underrepresented-in-Medicine (UiM) compared to non-UiM applicants. The gap between UiM and no-UiM groups is narrowing in recent years. Less well-studied are associations of acceptance decisions with family income and parental education. This study’s purpose is to evaluate the relationships between medical school acceptance and family income, parental education status, racial/ethnic background, Grade Point Average (GPA), Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score, and participation in extracurricular activities.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional study of first-time US medical school applicants between 2017 and 2020. Acceptance rates for first-time applicants were calculated for first-generation (FG), low-income (LI), and UiM applicants. Associations of these attributes with MCAT scores, science GPAs, and seven categories of extracurricular activities were evaluated. Regression analyses estimated associations between acceptance to medical school with all variables with and without interaction terms (FG*URM, LI*URM, FG*LI).ResultsThe overall acceptance rate for first-time applicants from 2017–2020 was 45.3%. The acceptance rates among FG, LI and UiM applicants were 37.9%, 39.6% and 44.2%, respectively. In univariable logistic regression analyses, acceptance was negatively associated with being FG (OR: 0.68, CI: 0.67–0.70), LI (OR: 0.70, CI: 0.69–0.72), and UiM (OR: 0.95, CI: 0.93–0.97). In multivariable regression, acceptance was most strongly associated with science GPA (OR: 7.15, CI: 6.78–7.54 for the highest quintile) and UiM (OR: 5.56, CI: 5.48–5.93) status and MCAT score (OR: 1.19, CI: 1.18–1.19), FG (OR: 1.14, CI: 1.10–1.18), and most extracurricular activities. Including interaction terms revealed a negative association between acceptance and LI (OR:0.90, CI: 0.87–0.94) and FG was no longer significant (OR:1.10, CI:0.96–1.08).ConclusionsCollectively these results suggest medical school admissions committees may be relying on holistic admission practices. While MCAT and GPA scores continue to predict acceptance, individuals from racially and ethnically UiM backgrounds have favorable odds of acceptance when controlling for MCAT and GPA. However, these positive associations were not seen for low-income and first-generation applicants. Additional preparation for college and the MCAT for these latter groups may help further diversify the medical profession.

Undue Burden the Medical School Application Process Places on Low-Income Latinos

Undue Burden the Medical School Application Process Places on Low-Income Latinos

Advising Orthopaedic Hopefuls in the Wake of a Pass/Fail US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1: A Proposed Method for Predicting US Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge Outcomes.

Matching into orthopaedic residency has become difficult, and the US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 transition to pass/fail scoring has complicated the process. Advisors' ability to mentor students has decreased, and program directors may rely on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores in selecting which candidates to interview. This study aims to offer a method to predict Step 2 CK outcomes based on preadmission and preclinical performance. The study investigated 486 students from a US medical school who enrolled in 2017 and 2018. Data on demographics, preadmission, and preclinical performance were collected. Before model creation, it was found that sex, Medical College Admission Test scores, Comprehensive Basic Science Examination performance, and preclinical curriculum performance produced optimal models. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression models were built to predict probabilities of four outcome levels of Step 2 CK: <235, 235 to 249, 250 to 265, and >265. Finally, nomograms were created to visualize probability calculations. Each model's odds ratios revealed that female sex, higher MCAT scores, and better Comprehensive Basic Science Examination and preclinical performance were associated with an increased likelihood of being in higher Step 2 CK scoring groups. Preclinical performance had a profound effect, especially for those in the top 1/3. Models were successful in assigning higher probabilities to students in higher Step 2 CK scoring groups in more than 80% of instances. Nomograms presented provide examples of how to apply these models to an individual student. This study presents a novel method for predicting probabilities of Step 2 CK outcomes that can be used to mentor students at a time point when Step 1 previously filled this role. It may assist in identifying orthopaedic hopefuls at risk of performing poorly on Step 2 CK and can foster the development of individualized guidance and mitigation strategies.

Does Masking MCAT Scores During Admissions Increase Equity?

To improve admissions process equity, the Uniformed Services University masked Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores at or above the 51st percentile to admissions committee members. This policy was aimed at improving admissions rates for applicants in 2 priority groups: those from races and ethnicities underrepresented in medicine (URM) and those from lower socioeconomic status, represented by first-generation college (FGC) graduates. All applicants invited to interview were included: 1,624 applicants from admissions years 2014-2016 before MCAT score masking and 1,668 applicants from admissions years 2018-2020 during MCAT score masking. Logistic regression determined admissions likelihood before and during masking. Independent sample t tests compared average admissions committee scores for all applicants and for those in priority groups. Linear regression determined the weight of MCAT scores on admissions committee scores. Despite there being more priority group applicants during MCAT score masking, the admissions likelihood for an individual priority group applicant decreased during this period. URM applicants had an odds ratio of 0.513 for acceptance during MCAT score masking compared to before masking, and FGC applicants had an odds ratio of 0.695. Masking significantly reduced mean admissions committee scores, which decreased approximately twice as much for priority group applicants as for nonpriority group applicants (0.96 points vs 0.51 points). These score decreases were highest for priority group applicants with MCAT scores above the 67th percentile. Masking reduced the weight of MCAT scores; 10.9% of admissions committee score variance was explained by MCAT scores before masking and only 1.2% during masking. Despite known disparities in MCAT scores with respect to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, admissions decisions in this study were more equitable when MCAT scores were included. While masking MCAT scores reduced the influence of the exam in admissions decisions, it also reduced admissions rates for URM and FGC applicants.

Medical Students' Socioeconomic Status and Academic Performance in Medical School.

Background Students from lower socioeconomic groups tend to underestimate their chances of acceptance to medical school and their likelihood of success once admitted. Objective The objective of this study is to determine if socioeconomic disadvantage status is linked to lower medical college admission test (MCAT) scores and academic performance in medical school. Methods Using the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) education/occupation (EO) indicator, we compared economically disadvantaged students to students with no financial disadvantage on the MCAT, Phase 1 National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME), United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, Phase 2 NBME, and USMLE Step 2 test scores. Results Medical students in the disadvantaged group scored significantly lower on the MCAT than students with no financial disadvantage. The disadvantaged group showed a non-significant lower trend in performance until USMLE Step 2. Conclusions Applicants from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may perform lower on their MCAT and early medical school benchmark exams, but they appear to catch up with and even surpass their peers on their USMLE Step 2 examination.

Increasing Diversity in the Physician Workforce: Pathway Programs and Predictive Analytics.

Lack of diversity in the physician workforce has well-documented negative impacts on health outcomes. Evidence supports the use of pathway or pipeline programs to recruit underrepresented in medicine students. However, data on how a pathway program should deliver instruction are lacking. This report describes a multiyear project to build such a system with the goal of increasing diversity within medical school cohorts and ultimately the physician workforce. In the 2015-2016 academic year, the Ponce Health Sciences University started a 3-phase project to create a data-driven medical school feeder system by coupling a pathway program with predictive analytics. Phase 1 launched the pathway program. Phase 2 developed and validated a predictive model that estimates United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 performance. Phase 3 is underway and focuses on adoption, implementation, and support. Data analysis compared 2 groups of students (pathway vs direct) across specific factors, including Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score, undergraduate grade point average (GPA), first-generation status, and Step 1 exam performance. Statistically significant differences were found between the 2 groups on the MCAT exam and undergraduate GPA; however, no significant differences were found between groups for first-generation status and performance on the Step 1 exam. This finding supports the authors' hypothesis that although pathway students have significantly lower mean MCAT exam scores compared with direct students, pathway students perform just as well on the USMLE Step 1 exam. Next steps include expanding the project to another campus, adding more socioeconomic status and first-generation data, and identifying best curricular predictors. The authors recommend that medical school programs use pathway programs and predictive analytics to create a more data-centered approach to accepting students with the goal of increasing physician workforce diversity.

Self-Reported Disadvantage in Medical School Admissions: A Call to Review, Revise, and Further Advance Holistic Review.

This study examined how applicants interpret the self-reported disadvantaged (SRD) question in the American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS) application. Data from 129,262 applicants who applied through AMCAS from 2017 through 2019 were used, including financial and family history, demographic characteristics, and work status and residence. Fifteen applicants from the 2020 and 2021 AMCAS cycles were interviewed about their experiences with the SRD question. Large effects were found for SRD applicants with fee assistance waivers ( h = 0.89), Pell grants ( h = 1.21), state or federal aid ( h = 1.10), and parents with less education ( h = 0.98) and non-SRD applicants with a large proportion of their education paid by family ( d = 1.03). Another large difference was found for reported family income distribution (73% of SRD applicants reporting family income < $50,000 vs 15% of non-SRD applicants). More SRD applicants were Black or Hispanic (26% vs 16% and 5% vs 5%), Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients (11% vs 2%), born outside the United States (32% vs 16%), and raised in a medically underserved area (60% vs 14%). There was a moderate effect for first-generation to college SRD applicants ( h = 0.61). SRD applicants had lower Medical College Admission Test scores ( d = 0.62) and overall and science grade point averages ( d = 0.50 and 0.49, respectively) but no meaningful differences in acceptance or matriculation rates. The interviews identified 5 themes: (1) unclear disadvantage definition; (2) different perceptions of disadvantage and overcoming challenges or obstacles ; (3) identification as disadvantaged or not; (4) SRD essay content; and (5) concerns about lack of transparency in how the SRD question is used in admissions. Revising the SRD question by including context, phrasing, and instructions for broader experience categories might be beneficial because of lack of transparency and understanding.

Breaking Down Grit: Persistency and Flexibility in the Career Plans of Military Medical Students.

The field of medicine is experiencing a crisis as high levels of physician and trainee burnout threaten the pipeline of future physicians. Grit, or passion and perseverance for long-term goals, has been studied in high-performing and elite military units and found to be predictive of successful completion of training in adverse conditions. The Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) graduates military medical leaders who make up a significant portion of the Military Health System physician workforce. Taken together, an improved understanding of the relationships between burnout, well-being, grit, and retention among USU graduates is critical to the success of the Military Health System. The current study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at USU and explored these relations among 519 medical students across three graduating classes. These students participated in two surveys approximately one year apart from October 2018 until November 2019. Participants completed measures on grit, burnout, and likelihood of leaving the military. These data were then merged with demographic and academic data (e.g., Medical College Admission Test scores) from the USU Long Term Career Outcome Study. These variables were then analyzed simultaneously using structural equation modeling to examine the relationships among variables in a single model. Results reaffirmed the 2-factor model of grit as both passion and perseverance (or interest consistency). No significant relationships emerged between burnout and other study variables. Sustained and focused interest was predictive of less likelihood of staying in the military. This study offers important insights into the relationship among well-being factors, grit, and long-term career planning in the military. The limitations of using a single-item measure of burnout and measuring behavioral intentions in a short time frame during undergraduate medical education highlight the importance of future longitudinal studies that can examine actual behaviors across a career lifespan. However, this study offers some key insights into potential impacts on the retention of military physicians. The findings suggest that military physicians who are most likely to stay in the military tend to embrace a more fluid and flexible medical specialty path. This is critical in expectation setting for the military to train and retain military physicians across a wide range of critical wartime specialties.

Blinding of Admissions Committee to MCAT Scores: Is There a Difference in Subsequent Medical School Performance Between Cohorts?

The Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) is designed to inform members of the admissions committee about applicants' academic readiness for medical school. Although previous work has shown that MCAT scores have some predictive validity evidence for a variety of medical student outcomes, there is also a concern that the MCAT is overly emphasized by admissions committees, which may, for example, affect matriculant diversity. The purpose of this study was to understand whether deemphasizing the MCAT by blinding committee members to applicants' specific scores has resulted in matriculants with different pre-clerkship and clerkship performance. The Admissions Committee from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) created a policy to blind admissions committee members to MCAT scores. The MCAT-blinded policy was implemented for classes of 2022 to 2024. This MCAT-blinded cohort's performance was compared with a previous cohort, classes of 2018 to 2020. Two analyses of covariance were performed to test for differences in the pre-clerkship and clerkship module scores. Undergraduate grade point average (uGPA) and MCAT percentile for matriculants were included as covariates. There were no statistically significant differences in either pre-clerkship or clerkship performance between the MCAT-revealed and MCAT-blinded cohorts. This study found similar medical school performance between the MCAT-blinded and MCAT-revealed cohorts. The research team plans to continuously follow these two cohorts to understand their performance further down their education path, including step 1 and step 2 examinations.

Policy Recommendations for Improving Rural Cancer Services in the United States.

Compared with urban residents, rural Americans have seen slower declines in cancer deaths, have lower incidence but higher death rates from cancers that can be prevented through screening, have lower screening rates, are more likely to present with later-stage cancers, and have poorer cancer outcomes and lower survival. Rural health provider shortages and lack of cancer services may explain some disparities. The literature was reviewed to identify factors contributing to rural health care capacity shortages and propose policy recommendations for improving rural cancer care. Uncompensated care, unfavorable payer mix, and low patient volume impede rural physician recruitment and retainment. Students from rural areas are more likely to practice there but are less likely to attend medical school because of lower graduation rates, grades, and Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores versus urban students. The cancer care infrastructure is costly and financially challenging in rural areas with high proportions of uninsured and publicly insured patients. A lack of data on oncology providers and equipment impedes coordinated efforts to address rural shortages. Graduate Medical Education funding greatly favors large, urban, tertiary care teaching hospitals over residency training in rural, critical access and community-based hospitals and clinics. Policies have the potential to transform rural health care. This includes increasing advanced practice provider postgraduate oncology training opportunities and expanding the scope of practice; improving health workforce and services data collection and aggregation; transforming graduate medical education subsidies to support rural student recruitment and rural training opportunities; and expanding federal and state financial incentives and payments to support the rural cancer infrastructure.

A preliminary study of the probitive value of personality assessment in medical school admissions within the United States

BackgroundAllopathic medicine faces a daunting challenge of selecting the best applicants because of the very high applicant / matriculant ratio. The quality of graduates ultimately reflects the quality of medical practice. Alarming recent trends in physician burnout, misconduct and suicide raise questions of whether we are selecting the right candidates. The United States (US) lags far behind the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe in the study of non-cognitive tests in medical school admissions. Although more recently, medical schools in both the UK, Europe and the US have begun to use situational judgement tests such as the Computer-Based Assessment for Sampling Personal Characteristics (CASPer) and the situational judgement test (SJT), recently developed by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and that these tests are, in a sense non-cognitive in nature, direct personality tests per se have not been utilized. We have historically used, in the admissions process within the US, knowledge, reasoning and exam performance, all of which are largely influenced by intelligence and also improved with practice. Personality, though also undoubtedly influenced by intelligence, is fundamentally different and subject to different kinds of measurements.MethodsA popular personality measurement used over the past two decades within the US in business and industry, but not medical school has been the Neo Personality Inventory – Revised (NEO-PI-R) Test. This test has not been utilized regularly in allopathic medicine probably because of the paucity of exploratory retrospective and validating prospective studies. The hypothesis which we tested was whether NEO-PI-R traits exhibited consistency between two institutions and whether their measurements showed probative value in predicting academic performance.ResultsOur retrospective findings indicated both interinstitutional consistencies and both positive and negative predictive values for certain traits whose correlative strengths exceeded traditional premed metrics: medical college admission test (MCAT) scores, grade point average (GPA), etc. for early academic performance.ConclusionsOur exploratory studies should catalyze larger and more detailed confirmatory studies designed to validate the importance of personality traits not only in predicting early medical school performance but also later performance in one’s overall medical career.

Impact of High School Quality on Academic Performance Throughout Medical School.

Numerous studies currently evaluate medical school success and performance using college Grade Point Average (GPA) and Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores. These studies demonstrate that students who score low on the MCAT will continually perform worse than their peers on medical school exams and board exams. We investigated where a student attended high school and how that factor can affect medical school performance because most studies evaluated performance based on college attendance. Our retrospective study evaluated 184 students at Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine (KSOM) and showed higher-quality high schools, in comparison to lower-quality high schools, affected medical school performance. We categorized two groups for high school quality based on the U.S. News scorecard for programs within Nevada: those students with a high school reading proficiency (HSRP) >50% and those with an HSRP <50%. These two groups were then standardized based on percentile within the school and averaged using HSRP, MCAT, pre-clinical, step 1, clinical, and step 2 scores. A line chart was graphed to demonstrate the difference between the two groups. As might be expected, our results showed significantly higher MCAT scores from students who attended high-quality versus low-quality high schools. Our results also showed that although students from low-quality high schools performed worse for the first part of medical school, by step 2, students will score similarly in both groups. Students who performed poorly on the MCAT and attended lower-quality high schools will score as competitively as their peers by step 2.

Promoting cultural competency and osteopathic medicine awareness among premedical students through a summer premedical rural enrichment program.

Premedical preparatory programs at osteopathic medical schools that recruit students from medically underserved areas (MUAs) may promote interest in practicing osteopathic medicine in underserved or rural areas. In these programs, emphasis on cultural competency may increase diversity among medical school applicants and decrease healthcare disparities in the future. The goal of this study is to determine whether a summer premedical rural enrichment program (PREP) held at an osteopathic medical school located in a MUA will foster greater prioritization of cultural competency in medicine, enhance interest in practicing in rural or underserved areas, and increase familiarity with osteopathic medicine. An eight-week summer PREP was hosted at the California Health Sciences University College of Osteopathic Medicine (CHSU-COM) in Clovis, California. Seventy-eight diverse participants were recruited from the Central Valley, an underserved region of California. Attendees were required to finish the formal application process and were recommended to have completed medical school prerequisite courses. The curriculum included Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) preparation through team-based learning sessions, introduction to the osteopathic medical school curriculum, osteopathic philosophy, and osteopathic manipulative medicine, as well as integrated anatomy and physiology sessions, medical school application workshops, mock interviews, simulation workshops, and sociology and cultural competency sessions. Data were collected via a voluntary and anonymous survey administered before and after the program with questions about familiarity with osteopathy, interest in practicing in underserved areas, medical school preparedness, and a post-course survey about cultural competency. The surveys had students rate statements on a Likert scale. Seventy-four of the 78 premedical students (95%) completed the pre-and postsurvey. There was a significant increase in agreement to statements evaluating medical school preparedness, osteopathic familiarity, and desire to practice medicine locally in the postprogram survey, compared to the preprogram survey. In the cultural competency postsurvey, 75.0% of the responses to questions that evaluated the positive effect of the course were "Agree" or "Strongly Agree." Of the reported postcourse outcomes, the average MCAT score was 504 ± 6.2 (38 students reported, 50.7%). Of the 27 participants who reported matriculation, 16 (59.2%) were admitted to osteopathic medical schools, 9 (33.3%) to allopathic medical schools, and 2 to other health programs. After completing the PREP program, premedical participants reported that they have better understanding of cultural competency and improvement in preparation for medical school, including familiarity with osteopathic medicine, and interest in serving MUAs. These findings indicate that similar programs may have a positive impact on MUAs. These programs may help create diverse and culturally competent osteopathic physicians.

Effects of Organ System Courses of the First Two Years of Medical School on the Performance of the Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination of the United States (COMLEX-USA) Level 2-Cognitive Evaluation

Objectives: The Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination of the United States (COMLEX-USA) Level 2-Cognitive Evaluation (CE) is a board examination that medical students usually take in the third or fourth year of medical school. A few researchers have investigated the prediction of COMLEX Level 2-CE scores based on the performance in third-year clerkships. However, given how close the clerkships are to the board exam, this type of prediction is too late for students to have adequate time to get assistance to prepare for COMLEX Level 2-CE. We aimed to investigate the predictive value of each organ system course during the first two years in predicting COMLEX Level 2-CE performance. Our findings will help students at risk focus on important basic and clinical sciences much earlier before preparing for COMLEX Level 2-CE.Methods: Academic data from students enrolled at Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine from 2011 to 2017 were retrieved. Data included the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores, course grades in the first two years of medical school, COMLEX Level 1 scores, and COMLEX Level 2-CE scores. Pearson correlation coefficients, a multiple linear regression model, and a backward stepwise regression model were generated for analysis.Results: The highest correlation with COMLEX Level 2-CE scores was the COMLEX Level 1 score, followed by the performances in the third-semester Cardiovascular System II (CV II) and Renal System II (REN II) courses. Multiple linear regression and backward stepwise regression predictive models found that scores on third-semester CV II and Principles of Clinical Medicine III (PCM III) were the most significant predictors of performance on Level 2-CE. Both models explained 46% of the variance in COMLEX Level 2-CE scores.Conclusions: Performances in third-semester courses are the most important predictors of COMLEX Level 2-CE scores.

The Validity of MCAT Scores in Predicting Students' Performance and Progress in Medical School: Results From a Multisite Study.

This is the first multisite investigation of the validity of scores from the current version of the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) in clerkship and licensure contexts. It examined the predictive validity of MCAT scores and undergraduate grade point averages (UGPAs) for performance in preclerkship and clerkship courses and on the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge examinations. It also studied students' progress in medical school. Researchers examined data from 17 U.S. and Canadian MD-granting medical schools for 2016 and 2017 entrants who volunteered for the research and applied with scores from the current MCAT exam. They also examined data for all U.S. medical schools for 2016 and 2017 entrants to regular-MD programs who applied with scores from the current exam. Researchers conducted linear and logistic regression analyses to determine whether MCAT total scores added value beyond UGPAs in predicting medical students' performance and progress. Importantly, they examined the comparability of prediction by sex, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Researchers reported medium to large correlations between MCAT total scores and medical student outcomes. Correlations between total UGPAs and medical student outcomes were similar but slightly lower. When MCAT scores and UGPAs were used together, they predicted student performance and progress better than either alone. Despite differences in average MCAT scores and UGPAs between students who self-identified as White or Asian and those from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, predictive validity results were comparable. The same was true for students from different socioeconomic backgrounds, and for males and females. These data demonstrate that MCAT scores add value to the prediction of medical student performance and progress and that applicants from different backgrounds who enter medical school with similar ranges of MCAT scores and UGPAs perform similarly in the curriculum.

Wy'east: An Innovative, Culturally Responsive Postbaccalaureate Pathway for American Indians and Alaska Natives.

American Indians and Alaska Natives (AIANs) face significant health disparities that are exacerbated by limited access to high-quality, culturally congruent health care providers. There are no premedical postbaccalaureate programs focused on AIAN students. The Northwest Native American Center of Excellence designed the Wy'east Pathway in 2018 to increase the number of AIANs matriculating to U.S. medical schools by supporting those on the cusp of matriculation. Wy'east scholars undertake 10 months of structured programming to augment their academic preparation, improve their Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores, and enhance their confidence and cultural identity. Cultural events and mentorship opportunities with AIAN faculty, staff, and cultural liaisons are threaded throughout the pathway curriculum to foster cultural resilience, mentorship, and community. Scholars earn conditional acceptance to Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) School of Medicine if they complete Wy'east and meet the following criteria: pass all examinations in the primary curricular threads, obtain a qualifying MCAT score, and meet professionalism standards. All 14 scholars who successfully completed Wy'east and met criteria in the first 2 cohorts (academic years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020) earned conditional acceptance to OHSU School of Medicine. Ten of the 14 scholars (71.4%) matriculated to OHSU School of Medicine, 2 (14.3%) matriculated to other medical schools, and 2 (14.3%) chose to pursue other health care fields. Wy'east scholars rated the foundational science of medicine and population health and epidemiology threads higher in terms of making them feel better prepared for medical school (mean = 4.71 and 4.83, respectively) than the academic skills and wellness thread (mean = 3.43). Over the next 5 years, Wy'east will grow incrementally to offer a total of 18 conditional acceptance spots per cohort across 3 medical schools. Longitudinal tracking of Wy'east scholars' medical training and career outcomes will be conducted.

Growth in basic science knowledge in first-year medical school and USMLE Step 1 results: a longitudinal investigation at one school.

Our US medical school uses National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) tests as progress tests during the pre-clerkship curriculum to assess students. In this study, we examined students' growth patterns using progress tests in the first year of medical school to identify students at risk for failing United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1. Growth Mixture Modeling (GMM) was used to examine the growth trajectories based on NBME progress test scores in the first year of medical school. Achieving a passing score on the USMLE Step 1 at the end of the second year of medical school was used as the distal outcome, controlling for Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores and underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status. A total of 518 students from a US medical school were included in the analysis. Five different growth patterns were identified based on students' NBME test results. Seventy-eight students identified in Group 1 had the lowest starting NBME test score (mean = 33.6, 95% CI 32.0-35.2) and lowest growth rate (mean = 2.30, 95% CI 2.06-2.53). All 26 students who failed Step 1 at the end of the second year were in Group 1 (failing rate = 33%). Meanwhile Group 4 (n = 65 students) had moderate starting NBME test scores (mean = 37.9, 95% CI 36.3-39.0) but the highest growth rate with mean slope at 6.07 (95% CI 5.40-6.73). This group of students achieved significant higher USMLE Step1 scores comparing with the 3 other groups of students (P < 0.05). Our study found students had heterogeneous growth patterns in progress test results in their first year of medical school. Growth patterns were highly predictive of USMLE step 1 results. This study can provide performance benchmarks for our future students to assess their progress and for medical educators to identify students who need support and guidance.

The Performance and Trajectory of Medical Students With Disabilities: Results From a Multisite, Multicohort Study.

To conduct a post-Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 multisite, multicohort study called the Pathways Project to assess the performance and trajectory of medical students with disabilities (SWDs). From June to December 2020, the authors conducted a matched cohort study of SWDs and nondisabled controls from 2 graduating cohorts (2018 and 2019) across 11 U.S. MD-granting medical schools. Each SWD was matched with 2 controls, one from their institution and, whenever possible, one from their cohort for Medical College Admission Test score and self-reported gender. Outcome measures included final attempt Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge scores, time to graduation, leave of absence, matching on first attempt, and matching to primary care. A total of 171 SWDs and 341 controls were included; the majority of SWDs had cognitive/learning disabilities (118/171, 69.0%). Compared with controls, SWDs with physical/sensory disabilities had similar times to graduation (88.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.0, 100.0 vs 95.1%, 95% CI: 90.3, 99.8; P = .20), Step 1 scores (229.6 vs 233.4; P = .118), and match on first attempt (93.9%, 95% CI: 86.9, 100.0 vs 94.6%, 95% CI: 91.8, 97.4; P = .842), while SWDs with cognitive/learning disabilities had lower Step 1 scores (219.4; P < .001) and were less likely to graduate on time (81.2%, 95% CI: 69.2, 93.2; P = .003) and match on first attempt (85.3%, 95% CI: 78.0, 92.7; P = .009). Accommodated SWDs had Step 1 scores that were 5.9 points higher than nonaccommodated SWDs (95% CI: -0.7, 12.5; P = .08). Structural barriers remain for SWDs with cognitive/learning disabilities, which could be partially mitigated by accommodations on high-stakes exams.

Predictors of Performance on the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge: A Systematic Literature Review.

In February 2020, the governing bodies of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) announced the decision to change Step 1 score reporting from a three-digit system to pass/fail designation. Previous studies theorized that Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) will become the numerical standard by which residency directors can quickly sort through program applicants. The goal of this study is to review prior research and identify significant factors associated with Step 2 CK outcomes.A systematic literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and ERIC that included articles published between 2005 and 2015 was conducted using the keywords “USMLE,” “Step 2 CK,” “score,” “success,” and “predictors.”After screening the initial search yield of 3,239 articles, 52 articles were included for this review. Positively correlated factors included Step 1 score, clinical block grades, Comprehensive Clinical Science Self-Assessment (CCSSA), Comprehensive Clinical Science Examination (CCSE), and volunteerism. Factors such as clerkship sequence and pass/fail grading failed to correlate with Step 2 CK. Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score (p < 0.01) and undergraduate grade point average (GPA) (p = 0.01) positively correlated, while age displayed a negative correlation. Additionally, females typically scored higher on Step 2 CK than their male peers.The study findings suggest that continuous learning and academic success throughout medical school positively influence eventual Step 2 CK scoring. Performance on USMLE practice examinations, Step 1, and clinical evaluations serve as positive predictors for Step 2 CK scores. Interestingly, changing answers and spending more time on each question during the examination were associated with higher scores.