Relationship between pathology curricular approaches and performance in the United States medical licensing examination (USMLE), step 1: a national cross-sectional study

A survey study on student preferences regarding pathology teaching in Germany: a call for curricular modernization

“…Our survey data suggests that the two are linked (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient 0.24) and thus improving grades would increase satisfaction with the course. This hypothesis must be viewed critically as Kumar et al present data that suggests changing curricular methods does not correlate with pathology testing performance [ 23 , 24 ]. A subgroup analysis of the 10,159 students included in the described study looked specifically at students with low scores on standardized tests.…”

Influence of a problem-based learning curriculum on the selection of pathology as a career: evidence from the Canadian match of 1993-2004

“…In the absence of an international or national standard, selfidentification as PBL versus non-PBL represents one of the only ways of classifying this somewhat nebulous quantity. This is a method that has been used explicitly by other authors including Kumar et al [11,12], and it appears to have been used implicitly in many other published analyses of PBL.…”

“…If the introduction of a PBL curriculum has no clear effect on the selection of pathology as a career, this should come as no surprise given that PBL appears to have had similarly minimal results on a variety of outcomes. Whether the measure is standardized certification examinations [9,[12][13][14][15][16], course examinations [17][18][19], clerkship evaluations [20], or student self-perception of knowledge [19], in general there appears to be minimal or no difference between medical students which can be independently attributed to PBL versus non-PBL instruction.…”

Changes in pathology instruction and student performance on the United States medical licensing examination step 1, 1995-2000: A nationwide 6-year longitudinal study

“…A previous report of ours analyzing data from the June 1997 examination also found that the student characteristics were major predictors. 10 During the study period, there was a substantial move toward integrated instruction of pathology. 1 The same period, especially for classes entering in 1994 to 1996 (taking the exam in 1995 to 1998), also saw an increase in Step 1 scores, which stabilized later.…”

“…Two largescale national studies that attempted to address the issue used performance in USMLE (United States Medical Licensure Examination) Step 1 as the outcome measure. 9,10 Both studies found the MCAT-bpv (Medical College Admission Test, composite of biological and physical sciences and verbal reasoning) scores to be strong predictors of USMLE Step 1 performance. In addition, Ripkey et al 9 reported that a small amount of variation in schools' Step 1 total score was predicted by the differing school policies on passing the Step 1 examination, and only a little of the variation (not significant) was attributable to the overall curricular approach after correcting for differences in school means of MCAT-bpv scores.…”