ArticleMedical science educator2024
Many Paths to the Summit: Survey of Step 1 Study Methods with Pass/Fail Scoring.
Article in Medical science educator, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Student-specific Factors Associated with Passing the USMLE Step 1 Examination Within an Institution-allotted Dedicated Study Period.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- The Impact of a Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1 Exam on USMLE Step 2 Exam Study Time.Medical science educator · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.