27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implications of Pass/Fail Step 1 Scoring: Plastic Surgery Program Director and Applicant Perspective

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Background:

          As early as 2022, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 results will be reported as pass or fail, rather than as 3-digit numeric scores. This survey examines the perspectives of plastic surgery applicants and program directors (PD) regarding this score reporting change.

          Methods:

          A 24-item survey was distributed to integrated applicants from the 2018–19 and 2019–20 application cycles. An analogous 28-item survey was sent to integrated and independent plastic surgery training program directors. Data were analyzed using summary tables and marginal homogeneity tests.

          Results:

          164 applicants (33.2%) and 64 PDs (62.1%) completed the survey. Most applicants (60.3%) and PDs (81.0%) were not in favor of the score reporting change. As a result of binary scoring, a majority of respondents anticipate that residency programs will use Step 2 CK scores to screen applicants (applicants: 95.7%, PDs: 82.8%), prioritize students from more prestigious medical schools (applicants: 91.5%, PDs: 52.4%), and that dedicated research time will become more important (applicants: 87.9%, PDs: 45.3%). Most applicants (66.4%) and PDs (53.1%) believe that there will be an increase in plastic surgery applicants. Applicants and PDs anticipate that the top 3 metrics used by programs when deciding to offer an interview will change as a result of binary Step 1 scoring.

          Conclusions:

          Most plastic surgery applicants and PDs do not support the change in United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scoring to pass or fail. The majority believe that other metrics (such as Step 2 CK scores, research experience, and medical school reputation) will become more important in the application process.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Examining Demographics, Prior Academic Performance, and United States Medical Licensing Examination Scores

          To examine whether demographic differences exist in United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores and the extent to which any differences are explained by students' prior academic achievement.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Away Rotations and Matching in Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency: Applicant and Program Director Perspectives.

            Although nearly all medical students pursuing integrated plastic surgery residency participate in elective rotations away from their home medical school, the value and costs of these "away" rotations have not been well studied.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Resident selection protocols in plastic surgery: a national survey of plastic surgery program directors.

              With the transition of many plastic surgery training programs from the traditional to the integrated/coordinated model, critical evaluation of the process by which medical students are selected for residency is needed. To increase the understanding of this process and to improve the manner in which candidates are vetted, a survey study was designed. A 29-question online survey was designed to discern desired qualities regarding resident selection, interview processes, resident participation, and program director satisfaction with the current process. This survey was sent to all 49 integrated/coordinated program directors in the United States. Forty-three of 49 program directors (87.8 percent) responded. High-quality letters of recommendation (author and substance) and performance on subinternship rotations and interviews were considered the most important qualities in selecting residents. Candidates' interview performance and rank order list position were considered by many to be indicative of resident quality, but responses varied. Forty-two of 43 program directors reported that their own residents participate in the interview and/or selection process. Overall, only 43.2 percent of respondents found the current process adequate for identifying potential problems. Furthermore, 39.5 percent of programs have dismissed a resident for academic or ethical reasons within the last 10 years. Residency selection is a relatively subjective, unstandardized process. Because medical school performance is not always indicative of ultimate resident quality, it is imperative that integrated/coordinated plastic surgery training programs improve selection protocols to discern who will most likely become a successful resident. A number of program directors are dissatisfied with the process, and better systems for selection would be beneficial.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open
                Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open
                GOX
                Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                2169-7574
                December 2020
                17 December 2020
                : 8
                : 12
                : e3266
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
                []Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tenn.
                []Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
                []Department of Plastic Surgery, Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
                [§ ]Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
                Author notes
                Jeffrey E. Janis, MD, FACS, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 915 Olentangy River Rd, Columbus, OH 43212, E-mail: jeffrey.janis@ 123456osumc.edu
                Article
                00054
                10.1097/GOX.0000000000003266
                7787322
                33425583
                07efe844-2703-4d1d-82ea-7edf0f51f1c2
                Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

                History
                : 24 September 2020
                : 28 September 2020
                Categories
                Plastic Surgery Focus
                Special Topic
                Custom metadata
                TRUE
                UNITED STATES

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log