Matching neurology as a DO?

[cryhavoc]

Is it all board score or do you need research?

I was always interested in psychiatry but I did well above the class average in neurology and find it comes naturally to me whereas many of my classmates struggled at it. And it just seems so interesting. I have very few things that come naturally to me, always had to work hard, so it peaked my interest.

So I don't want to take it off the table or realm of possibility in the future. Heck, I might even be interested a dual neuro/psych.

In order to not sabotage future me in case I do change my mind and decide neuro, is research necessary? Would undergrad neuro research be adequate or does it need to be in med school?

Would volunteer work with people suffering from neurological disorders be sufficient? I much prefer volunteering with people, I found testing lab animals to be boring. More of hands on person than a researcher.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Rekt]

Edit: I can't read apparently.

 

[Ioannes Paulus]

Too early for you to decide.
Neurology isn't competitive at all mostly because no one is interested in it. The anatomy is painfully challenging and lesion localization is not as exciting as clinicians make it out to be. Also, the patient population (mostly epilepsy, stroke survivors, etc.) makes it a very depressing field (for most people). I've also heard that the market is saturated in most cities and a fellowship is a necessity at this point.

 

[Reveler]

It's indeed a small world, but above average USMLE scores and research for a DO applicant will definitely help out. Try to do a neuro rotation early in your clinical years. Most neurologists practice in outpatient clinics, and this can be a drag. Once upon a time, I was interested in neurology, but I couldn't stand the repetition of standard cases: migraines, strokes, (diabetic) neuropathy, dementia, headaches, headaches, parkinsons, headaches, neuropathy, headache, headache...

You get the picture. But to answer your initial question, you need to have some good neuro-oriented ECs to show that you're interested. Research would be great (especially neuro research), but if you're a great applicant otherwise, this shouldn't exclude you. Check out Charting Outcomes in the Match for Osteopathic students for more info.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

Too early for you to decide.
Neurology isn't competitive at all mostly because no one is interested in it. The anatomy is painfully challenging and lesion localization is not as exciting as clinicians make it out to be. Also, the patient population (mostly epilepsy, stroke survivors, etc.) makes it a very depressing field (for most people). I've also heard that the market is saturated in most cities and a fellowship is a necessity at this point.

Last year, neuro was the highest field in demand according to PracticeLink. The number of jobs to number of graduates is nearly 2:1. Neuro is on par with FM and Psych in terms of damand.

But like you said, no one wants to do it and that's perfect for people like me who are genuinely interested in the field.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

I'll leave this link here. Tons of valuable information in this thread
Everything Neurology!

 

[Mad Jack]

It's quite a small and competitive world. Just from my small experiences about NSG on SDN and in real life, ALL of the successful DO applicants I've know have done well on boards AND have had multiple research experiences in medical school including publications, posters, abstracts, etc.

He's asking about neurology, not NSG bro.

 

[nowaysanjose]

Too early for you to decide.
Neurology isn't competitive at all mostly because no one is interested in it. The anatomy is painfully challenging and lesion localization is not as exciting as clinicians make it out to be. Also, the patient population (mostly epilepsy, stroke survivors, etc.) makes it a very depressing field (for most people). I've also heard that the market is saturated in most cities and a fellowship is a necessity at this point.

What makes you think the field is saturated?

 

[Mr Kenobi]

 

[cryhavoc]

Last year, neuro was the highest field in demand according to PracticeLink. The number of jobs to number of graduates is nearly 2:1. Neuro is on par with FM and Psych in terms of damand.

But like you said, no one wants to do it and that's perfect for people like me who are genuinely interested in the field.

This might sound pretentious but the rest of the body is so boring compared to the mind. It is what allured me to psychiatry and partly to neurology. The rest of the organs just keep us alive. The brain controls everything. It is our personality. The electricity and chemistry going on upstairs is our very soul. Downstairs is maintenance.

Maybe I should do some shadowing and see what I think.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

This might sound pretentious but the rest of the body is so boring compared to the mind. It is what allured me to psychiatry and partly to neurology. The rest of the organs just keep us alive. The brain controls everything. It is our personality. The electricity and chemistry going on upstairs is our very soul. Downstairs is maintenance.

Maybe I should do some shadowing and see what I think.

Human brain is the most fascinating thing on the planet. I'd love to be the engineer of this complex machine.

 

[68PGunner]

Last year, neuro was the highest field in demand according to PracticeLink. The number of jobs to number of graduates is nearly 2:1. Neuro is on par with FM and Psych in terms of damand.

But like you said, no one wants to do it and that's perfect for people like me who are genuinely interested in the field.

How do I see jobs to # of graduates by specialty?

 

[Postictal Raiden]

How do I see jobs to # of graduates by specialty?

you can see the number of jobs per specialty on PracticeLink.com. Use NRMP to see the number of pgy-1.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

How do I see jobs to # of graduates by specialty?

For example, the number of neuro jobs is 1054. Number of pgy-1 for neuro in 2013 (because it's the class of residents that is graduating this year) was ~660). Compare that to 291 jobs for 380 prospctive PMR grads.

 

[LilOrphanFourval]

This might sound pretentious but the rest of the body is so boring compared to the mind. It is what allured me to psychiatry and partly to neurology. The rest of the organs just keep us alive. The brain controls everything. It is our personality. The electricity and chemistry going on upstairs is our very soul. Downstairs is maintenance.

Maybe I should do some shadowing and see what I think.

Graduated with a degree in neuroscience and philosophy. I'm currently scribing for Neuro, among other specialties. Neurology is "maintenance". I've a couple of hundred hours and 98% of the time neuro is

Too early for you to decide.
Neurology isn't competitive at all mostly because no one is interested in it. The anatomy is painfully challenging and lesion localization is not as exciting as clinicians make it out to be. Also, the patient population (mostly epilepsy, stroke survivors, etc.) makes it a very depressing field (for most people). I've also heard that the market is saturated in most cities and a fellowship is a necessity at this point.

It's indeed a small world, but above average USMLE scores and research for a DO applicant will definitely help out. Try to do a neuro rotation early in your clinical years. Most neurologists practice in outpatient clinics, and this can be a drag. Once upon a time, I was interested in neurology, but I couldn't stand the repetition of standard cases: migraines, strokes, (diabetic) neuropathy, dementia, headaches, headaches, parkinsons, headaches, neuropathy, headache, headache...

You get the picture. But to answer your initial question, you need to have some good neuro-oriented ECs to show that you're interested. Research would be great (especially neuro research), but if you're a great applicant otherwise, this shouldn't exclude you. Check out Charting Outcomes in the Match for Osteopathic students for more info.

It just feels very... mechanical. If you do diagnostics I hear it's a bit more interesting, but the actual patient visits seem terribly uniform. Day to day it doesn't change very much. I may only be a scribe (so take my opinion with a grain of salt) but I've been turned off of Neuro after spending so much time in the department. On the plus side, the hours the physicians do at the hospital is pretty standard 8-5, and days off seem to be relatively frequent, so the lifestyle is good.

 

[Ioannes Paulus]

On the plus side, the hours the physicians do at the hospital is pretty standard 8-5, and days off seem to be relatively frequent, so the lifestyle is good.

LOL
Neuro is known to have the worst non-surgical call schedule during residency and, with the advent of "primary/secondary stroke centers" more and more future neurologists have to take overnight call that is, arguably, worse than Ob/Gyns, especially in small towns. Imagine getting a call at 3AM with stroke alert and you have to be at the hospital in 30 mins. If your late and the time to administer TPA has passed, the family can sue the hospital for negligence or lower standard of care.

 

[LilOrphanFourval]

LOL
Neuro is known to have the worst non-surgical call schedule during residency and, with the advent of "primary/secondary stroke centers" more and more future neurologists have to take overnight call that is, arguably, worse than Ob/Gyns, especially in small towns. Imagine getting a call at 3AM with stroke alert and you have to be at the hospital in 30 mins. If your late and the time to administer TPA has passed, the family can sue the hospital for negligence or lower standard of care.

I've only scribed for attendings, can't speak for residents. Outpatient Neurology at a hospital is pretty chill.

 

[cryhavoc]

I'm actually not expecting to enjoy the work schedule of any residency. Although I do factor lifestyle post-residency into my decisions. I want to have a family and be there for them, AND be a doctor.

 

[hallowmann]

Neuro is an awesome field. It's still early for to decide, but if it's what you want, go for it. I strongly considered it, but the same issue I have with specialties kept coming up. At the end of the day, it's not the type of doc I pictured myself being. You just have to be honest with yourself on your decision.

You need to get on a Neuro rotation early, and/or another one near the end of 3rd or beginning of 4th at a Neuro residency to get a solid LOR. You need to be applying with a letter from an academic neuro doc. Apply broadly too. Knew someone that didn't do either of those things and it didn't end well. Even if you can't get the LOR, still apply and do so broadly.

I'm not sure how important attending conferences are, but it might be something to consider. Others that have done it can comment as to whether that's beneficial.

...It just feels very... mechanical. If you do diagnostics I hear it's a bit more interesting, but the actual patient visits seem terribly uniform. Day to day it doesn't change very much. I may only be a scribe (so take my opinion with a grain of salt) but I've been turned off of Neuro after spending so much time in the department. On the plus side, the hours the physicians do at the hospital is pretty standard 8-5, and days off seem to be relatively frequent, so the lifestyle is good.

Welcome to the majority of medicine, especially specialized medicine. 90% of what you do will be the same day in and day out. Make sure you enjoy that 90% enough to do it, and make sure you love that 10%.

LOL
Neuro is known to have the worst non-surgical call schedule during residency and, with the advent of "primary/secondary stroke centers" more and more future neurologists have to take overnight call that is, arguably, worse than Ob/Gyns, especially in small towns. Imagine getting a call at 3AM with stroke alert and you have to be at the hospital in 30 mins. If your late and the time to administer TPA has passed, the family can sue the hospital for negligence or lower standard of care.

Neuro docs can choose how they work. Tons of OBs work in groups and have designated call shifts. Neuro is doing the same, and many docs take very little call. A bunch of proclaimed stroke centers use teleneuro, so some doc halfway across the country in their underwear is telling the EM doc or hospitalist to push tpa after getting a stroke scale via essentially ipads. I've watched senior Neuro residents and attendings take call from home, only rarely rush in.

Like anything else, it has its pros and cons.

 

[McDreamy123]

Tons of DO's matched neuro at northeast ivy program I did research at. Just show interest

 

[DetectiveAlonzo]

Shoot... what if you really do not like doing research at all? Any other ways to show interest in neuro?

 

[Goro]

How about asking a Program Director?
http://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/NRMP-2016-Program-Director-Survey.pdf

See page 65 and following.

It's a very DO-friendly field.

Is it all board score or do you need research?

I was always interested in psychiatry but I did well above the class average in neurology and find it comes naturally to me whereas many of my classmates struggled at it. And it just seems so interesting. I have very few things that come naturally to me, always had to work hard, so it peaked my interest.

So I don't want to take it off the table or realm of possibility in the future. Heck, I might even be interested a dual neuro/psych.

In order to not sabotage future me in case I do change my mind and decide neuro, is research necessary? Would undergrad neuro research be adequate or does it need to be in med school?

Would volunteer work with people suffering from neurological disorders be sufficient? I much prefer volunteering with people, I found testing lab animals to be boring. More of hands on person than a researcher.

 

[ananasmed]

Anyone know how receptive programs are to COMLEX-only applicants? Obviously this will vary by program, but in general?

 

[hallowmann]

Anyone know how receptive programs are to COMLEX-only applicants? Obviously this will vary by program, but in general?

Why not just take Step 1 and not worry about it? Of you're already a 3rd year, then strongly consider taking Step 2. I found it very similar to the Level 2, and at least it'll give programs an idea of where you stand compared to MDs.

 

[ananasmed]

Why not just take Step 1 and not worry about it? Of you're already a 3rd year, then strongly consider taking Step 2. I found it very similar to the Level 2, and at least it'll give programs an idea of where you stand compared to MDs.

Thanks. I'm a second year and currently planning to take Step 1, but was just curious about the experience of students who only took COMLEX. Worried I won't do well enough on Step 1.

 

[hallowmann]

Thanks. I'm a second year and currently planning to take Step 1, but was just curious about the experience of students who only took COMLEX. Worried I won't do well enough on Step 1.

Make sure you take NBMEs leading up to it. If you aren't getting at least in the high 21x's or low 22x's then I wouldn't take it. The NBMEs are very predictive for Step 1, like +/- 5 points. As long as it looks like you're on the right track, you should be fine.

 

[Goro]

Again, ask a Program Director. The survey cited above tells you in general are OK with COMLEX only.

Anyone know how receptive programs are to COMLEX-only applicants? Obviously this will vary by program, but in general?

 

[Goro]

If you are in the bottom 1/3rd of your Class, I recommend COMLEX only. Your Class will have the last DO-only crack at AOA residencies.

Thanks. I'm a second year and currently planning to take Step 1, but was just curious about the experience of students who only took COMLEX. Worried I won't do well enough on Step 1.

 

[ananasmed]

@Goro thanks. I looked at the survey and see the data, but you never know what a program means when they say "accept COMLEX scores" -- do they "accept" the scores, but really wish the applicant had a USMLE score to better compare them to MD students? Especially since neurology has very few AOA programs, it's kind of a toss up.

I'm not in the bottom third of my class, but obviously trying to avoid a worst-case-scenario very poor score that would hinder my application. Thanks again for the advice.

 

[Goro]

Your preclinical GPA is the best indicator of how you'll do on Boards. If you're in the upper half of your class, I think that you're good to go for USMLE. Just do as many practice questions as you can find, from whatever source.

@Goro thanks. I looked at the survey and see the data, but you never know what a program means when they say "accept COMLEX scores" -- do they "accept" the scores, but really wish the applicant had a USMLE score to better compare them to MD students? Especially since neurology has very few AOA programs, it's kind of a toss up.

I'm not in the bottom third of my class, but obviously trying to avoid a worst-case-scenario very poor score that would hinder my application. Thanks again for the advice.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

If you are in the bottom 1/3rd of your Class, I recommend COMLEX only. Your Class will have the last DO-only crack at AOA residencies.

Wrong! This is fake news.

Only time you should give up on USMLE is when you are scoring low in your practice tests. How well you perform in classes doesn't necessarily translate into board performance.

 

[BorntobeDO?]

If you are in the bottom 1/3rd of your Class, I recommend COMLEX only. Your Class will have the last DO-only crack at AOA residencies.

Wrong! This is fake news.

Only time you should give up on USMLE is when you are scoring low in your practice tests. How well you perform in classes doesn't necessarily translate into board performance.

I think you are both right. The bottom 1/3rd of the class prob will do bad in general on boards, but individually you should check anyway (cause who knows, maybe your class is super competative or something). Still, I don't see the need to bash Goro, I appreciate his insight.

 

[W19]

Neuro does not seem to be too competitive... You should be ok with a 220+ on step1. However, that's the tricky part because I have seen so many in this forum who scored well on COMLEX but couldn't muster a mediocre score an step1. I don't get it TBH.

 

[Goro]

Well, Rob, the problem with the dangerously ignorant opinion posted above is that bench warmers rarely go and hit home runs in the bottom of the 9th. More often, you see academically strong students do poorly on Boards. This is usually due to some adverse life event right at Boards time. Academically weak students perform weakly on Boards, and they also typically fail to prepare adequately.

"Fake news" is the term Der Trumppenfuher uses for "data" or "reality". Here's some data/reality, not opinion:

Predictors of scoring at least 600 on COMLEX-USA Level 1: successful preparation strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes. - PubMed - NCBI

Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: a retrospective study over a 20-year period. - PubMed - NCBI

Strategies for identifying students at risk for USMLE step 1 failure. - PubMed - NCBI

This one I'm particularly proud of:
Medical gross anatomy as a predictor of performance on the USMLE Step 1. - PubMed - NCBI (and BTW, Pathology grades are NOT a good predictor!!!)

A model for predicting performance on the NBME Part I examination. - PubMed - NCBI

At my school, we have 15 years' worth of data that almost point for point right on the linear regression line that preclinical GPA is a predictor for COMLEX I. Yes, NBME shelf exams are also great predictors, but the two go hand in hand. So let me modify my advice: If your preclinical GPA is < 80, take only COMLEX. If your Pre-clinical GPA is < 85, but > 80, take USMLE with with eyes open and caution.

If your preclinical GPA is > 85, take both exams and rock the world. You'll be fine.

I think you are both right. The bottom 1/3rd of the class prob will do bad in general on boards, but individually you should check anyway (cause who knows, maybe your class is super competative or something). Still, I don't see the need to bash Goro, I appreciate his insight.

 

[BorntobeDO?]

Well, Rob, the problem with the dangerously ignorant opinion posted above is that bench warmers rarely go and hit home runs in the bottom of the 9th. More often, you see academically strong students do poorly on Boards. This is usually due to some adverse life event right at Boards time. Academically weak students perform weakly on Boards, and they also typically fail to prepare adequately.

"Fake news" is the term Der Trumppenfuher uses for "data" or "reality". Here's some data/reality, not opinion:

Predictors of scoring at least 600 on COMLEX-USA Level 1: successful preparation strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes. - PubMed - NCBI

Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: a retrospective study over a 20-year period. - PubMed - NCBI

Strategies for identifying students at risk for USMLE step 1 failure. - PubMed - NCBI

This one I'm particularly proud of:
Medical gross anatomy as a predictor of performance on the USMLE Step 1. - PubMed - NCBI (and BTW, Pathology grades are NOT a good predictor!!!)

A model for predicting performance on the NBME Part I examination. - PubMed - NCBI

At my school, we have 15 years' worth of data that almost point for point right on the linear regression line that preclinical GPA is a predictor for COMLEX I. Yes, NBME shelf exams are also great predictors, but the two go hand in hand. So let me modify my advice: If your preclinical GPA is < 80, take only COMLEX. If your Pre-clinical GPA is < 85, but > 80, take USMLE with with eyes open and caution.

If your preclinical GPA is > 85, take both exams and rock the world. You'll be fine.

I have no doubt that your right, but even if I was in the bottom 1/3rd I would take an NBME and check. Thats what I was advocating. I don't disagree with you at all tho.

 

[Goro]

Just more risking when as long as you do well on COMLEX, there are plenty of programs that will be happy with that. Generally, DO students do worse on USMLE I, unless they're up at the top of the class.

I have no doubt that your right, but even if I was in the bottom 1/3rd I would take an NBME and check. Thats what I was advocating. I don't disagree with you at all tho.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I think you are both right. The bottom 1/3rd of the class prob will do bad in general on boards, but individually you should check anyway (cause who knows, maybe your class is super competative or something). Still, I don't see the need to bash Goro, I appreciate his insight.

You consider that "bashing?"

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Well, Rob, the problem with the dangerously ignorant opinion posted above is that bench warmers rarely go and hit home runs in the bottom of the 9th. More often, you see academically strong students do poorly on Boards. This is usually due to some adverse life event right at Boards time. Academically weak students perform weakly on Boards, and they also typically fail to prepare adequately.

"Fake news" is the term Der Trumppenfuher uses for "data" or "reality". Here's some data/reality, not opinion:

Predictors of scoring at least 600 on COMLEX-USA Level 1: successful preparation strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes. - PubMed - NCBI

Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: a retrospective study over a 20-year period. - PubMed - NCBI

Strategies for identifying students at risk for USMLE step 1 failure. - PubMed - NCBI

This one I'm particularly proud of:
Medical gross anatomy as a predictor of performance on the USMLE Step 1. - PubMed - NCBI (and BTW, Pathology grades are NOT a good predictor!!!)

A model for predicting performance on the NBME Part I examination. - PubMed - NCBI

At my school, we have 15 years' worth of data that almost point for point right on the linear regression line that preclinical GPA is a predictor for COMLEX I. Yes, NBME shelf exams are also great predictors, but the two go hand in hand. So let me modify my advice: If your preclinical GPA is < 80, take only COMLEX. If your Pre-clinical GPA is < 85, but > 80, take USMLE with with eyes open and caution.

If your preclinical GPA is > 85, take both exams and rock the world. You'll be fine.

The term fake news was actually created by hillary clinton to blame losing her election on anyone but her own incompetence. Since then, the Trump administration used it as a form of mockery.

It doesn't matter how many articles you put out there. I never made the argument that students at the bottom usually do well on boards or anything like that. However, you did make a blanket statement where you said anyone that is in the bottom 1/3 should only consider COMLEX. This is absolutely ignorant as it tries to paint everyone with one brush. Sometimes bench warmers do hit a homerun. In my class, the student ranked 197 ended up with the 9th highest board score in the entire program. The idea of using a practice tests like the NBME to gauge your capacity to do well on the boards is much better than some anatomy grade you want to use. Anyone that's taken boards knows NBME's are the real predictors, so if you are in the top 1/3, middle or bottom, take an NBME exam. If you are scoring well enough to be at 220+, don't listen to people like you (Goro) who have never taken boards.

 

[BorntobeDO?]

You consider that "bashing?"

I saw the response, and I see this back and forth is about more than the discussion at hand. Politics is not something I am really interested in delving into for precisely this reason. Calling what he said Fake News seemed a bit harsh when it was a valid point.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I saw the response, and I see this back and forth is about more than the discussion at hand. Politics is not something I am really interested in delving into for precisely this reason. Calling what he said Fake News seemed a bit harsh when it was a valid point.

I thought that by using those phrases in that way that it would be interpreted as the joke it was meant to be, but okay, I understand written language is open to misinterpretation.

 

[Goro]

I prefer data to anecdotes, and my observations have been made from close to 20 years of teaching medical students (close to 1500 of them).

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

I prefer data to anecdotes, and my observations have been made from close to 20 years of teaching medical students (close to 1500 of them).

I'm pretty sure any study you point to will show outliers. That's like basic statistics. Or maybe you don't understand the argument I'm making.

You can "teach" as many med students as you want. I actually live being a medical students and am personally around them.

 

[cryhavoc]

Well, Rob, the problem with the dangerously ignorant opinion posted above is that bench warmers rarely go and hit home runs in the bottom of the 9th. More often, you see academically strong students do poorly on Boards. This is usually due to some adverse life event right at Boards time. Academically weak students perform weakly on Boards, and they also typically fail to prepare adequately.

"Fake news" is the term Der Trumppenfuher uses for "data" or "reality". Here's some data/reality, not opinion:

Predictors of scoring at least 600 on COMLEX-USA Level 1: successful preparation strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes. - PubMed - NCBI

Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: a retrospective study over a 20-year period. - PubMed - NCBI

Strategies for identifying students at risk for USMLE step 1 failure. - PubMed - NCBI

This one I'm particularly proud of:
Medical gross anatomy as a predictor of performance on the USMLE Step 1. - PubMed - NCBI (and BTW, Pathology grades are NOT a good predictor!!!)

A model for predicting performance on the NBME Part I examination. - PubMed - NCBI

At my school, we have 15 years' worth of data that almost point for point right on the linear regression line that preclinical GPA is a predictor for COMLEX I. Yes, NBME shelf exams are also great predictors, but the two go hand in hand. So let me modify my advice: If your preclinical GPA is < 80, take only COMLEX. If your Pre-clinical GPA is < 85, but > 80, take USMLE with with eyes open and caution.

If your preclinical GPA is > 85, take both exams and rock the world. You'll be fine.

We still have classes left but I'm at an 84 by my rough calculations. But if second year is harder, it might come down a bit. I'll definitely take this into advisement. I rather rock one exam and only apply to places that take it, and look good than risk doing poorly and having it drag me down.

I'd also take a practice USMLE as a litmus test.
Thanks everyone.

 

[IsWhat]

With the merger coming up, everyone needs to consider taking the USMLE - even those at the bottom of the class. Too many PDs are willing to look beyond a poor step 1 score (as long as you have it) that not taking it will be a massive disadvantage moving forward. This <80 stuff is pre-merger where DOs had a safety blanket. The lowest ranked MD students don't get to side-step the USMLE, and for us to move our profession forward we need everyone to start playing ball with the big boys.

 

[cryhavoc]

Maybe they can take the COMLEX.

Although I would be interested to know how standardized testing is going to change with the merger. As I graduate the year of the merger. And want to make sure I'm studying properly and appropriately. If I'm going to be forced to take USMLE, I would love some forewarning to prepare.

 

[Goro]

We still have classes left but I'm at an 84 by my rough calculations. But if second year is harder, it might come down a bit. I'll definitely take this into advisement. I rather rock one exam and only apply to places that take it, and look good than risk doing poorly and having it drag me down.

I'd also take a practice USMLE as a litmus test.
Thanks everyone.

I think that if you're at an avg of 84, that's a good place to be.

 

[cryhavoc]

I think that if you're at an avg of 84, that's a good place to be.

For my interest in possibly neurology as a specialty via COMLEX or for choosing to take USMLE?

To be honest, prestige isn't hugely important to me. As long as the program helps me become a competent physician, I'll take it. If I can get there via COMLEX and save myself the effort, I will.

 

[Goro]

Yes

For my interest in possibly neurology as a specialty via COMLEX or for choosing to take USMLE?

To be honest, prestige isn't hugely important to me. As long as the program helps me become a competent physician, I'll take it. If I can get there via COMLEX and save myself the effort, I will.

 

[hallowmann]

For my interest in possibly neurology as a specialty via COMLEX or for choosing to take USMLE?

To be honest, prestige isn't hugely important to me. As long as the program helps me become a competent physician, I'll take it. If I can get there via COMLEX and save myself the effort, I will.

Expect to take Step 1, take practice NBMEs leading up to it, and if things are going well, just take it. There's no point limiting yourself with only a COMLEX if you can even just do OK on the Step. Its not about prestige, its about keeping your options open.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

Tons of DO's matched neuro at northeast ivy program I did research at. Just show interest

Well, Rob, the problem with the dangerously ignorant opinion posted above is that bench warmers rarely go and hit home runs in the bottom of the 9th. More often, you see academically strong students do poorly on Boards. This is usually due to some adverse life event right at Boards time. Academically weak students perform weakly on Boards, and they also typically fail to prepare adequately.

"Fake news" is the term Der Trumppenfuher uses for "data" or "reality". Here's some data/reality, not opinion:

Predictors of scoring at least 600 on COMLEX-USA Level 1: successful preparation strategies. - PubMed - NCBI

Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination-USA level 1 and level 2-cognitive evaluation preparation and outcomes. - PubMed - NCBI

Student failures on first-year medical basic science courses and the USMLE step 1: a retrospective study over a 20-year period. - PubMed - NCBI

Strategies for identifying students at risk for USMLE step 1 failure. - PubMed - NCBI

This one I'm particularly proud of:
Medical gross anatomy as a predictor of performance on the USMLE Step 1. - PubMed - NCBI (and BTW, Pathology grades are NOT a good predictor!!!)

A model for predicting performance on the NBME Part I examination. - PubMed - NCBI

At my school, we have 15 years' worth of data that almost point for point right on the linear regression line that preclinical GPA is a predictor for COMLEX I. Yes, NBME shelf exams are also great predictors, but the two go hand in hand. So let me modify my advice: If your preclinical GPA is < 80, take only COMLEX. If your Pre-clinical GPA is < 85, but > 80, take USMLE with with eyes open and caution.

If your preclinical GPA is > 85, take both exams and rock the world. You'll be fine.

I think what he's trying to say is that even if you're in the bottom ⅓ of your class, it's still worth it to shell out 50$ for a practice exam and see exactly where you stand regarding the USMLE. If you're scores are good for it there's no reason why you shouldn't take it regardless of your class rank.