Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37255670›Full record

ReviewJB & JS open access

Removing or Only Moving a Barrier? Screening Applications with US Medical Licensing Examination Step 2CK Instead of Step 1 May Benefit Women but Not Underrepresented Minorities in Orthopaedics.

William H Huffman, Steven R Ayotte, Mitchell A Johnson, Cara A Cipriano

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

William H HuffmanPerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6287-3913
Steven R AyottePerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2466-603X
Mitchell A JohnsonPerelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0241-849X
Cara A CiprianoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1609-9899
University of Pennsylvania · USHospital of the University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most orthopaedic surgery program directors report using a minimum score cutoff for the US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 examination when evaluating residency applicants. The transition to a Pass/Fail grading system beginning in the 2022-2023 application cycle will alter applicant evaluation in the interview selection process. The impact of this change, particularly on women and underrepresented minority (URM) applicants, remains unclear. This study was designed to evaluate how a shift to screening applications using Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) instead of Step 1 scores could impact selection for residency interviews. Methods: We reviewed all 855 Electronic Residency Application Service applications submitted to the University of Pennsylvania's orthopaedic surgery residency program in the 2020-2021 cycle. Applicant age, sex, medical school of graduation, self-identified race, and permanent zip code were evaluated for association with Step 1 and Step 2CK scores using a 2-sample Results: Multivariable linear regression revealed both Step 1 and 2CK scores were lower for applicants of URM status (Step 1: p < 0.001; Step 2CK: p < 0.001) and from international medical schools (p = 0.043; p = 0.006). Step 1 scores but not Step 2CK scores were lower for applicants who were women (p < 0.001; p = 0.730), ≥30 years of age (p < 0.001; p = 0.079), and from medical schools outside the top 25 in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding or Conclusions: Conversion of Step 1 grading to Pass/Fail may reduce barriers for groups with lower average Step 1 scores (URM, female, ≥30 years of age, and from institutions with lower NIH funding or Level of Evidence: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID37255670
PMCPMC10226614
OpenAlexW4378781435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.