OMFS residency

[carabelliscusp]

Specifically he said “you know a lot of people applying will have a higher score than you”.

A 69 EPC is around 80th percentile for OMFS applicants according to AAOMS. When did 20% of test takers become “a lot more people than you”?

It made really suspicious they don’t know the difference in scoring

It's so annoying that they couldn't just pick 1 score and auto-convert everything to it. There's no way all these PD's pull out score conversion charts and actually bother to do the conversion themself to rank candidates. It's a psychological thing like how 99 cents << $1. Obviously they'll pick someone who took CBSE 2 years ago with a 76 vs current 69% EPC even tho there the same.

Also where did you find this 80th percentile stat?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[meddreamer21]

In general, is 4y program more competitive now than 6y. I heard reverse was true years ago?

 

[DMD12345]

In general, is 4y program more competitive now than 6y. I heard reverse was true years ago?

Depends how you define competitive. How I understand it:
4 years = more people apply, average rank/cbse is lower
6 years = less people apply, average rank/cbse is higher

 

[IndifferentOsteoblast]

It's so annoying that they couldn't just pick 1 score and auto-convert everything to it. There's no way all these PD's pull out score conversion charts and actually bother to do the conversion themself to rank candidates. It's a psychological thing like how 99 cents << $1. Obviously they'll pick someone who took CBSE 2 years ago with a 76 vs current 69% EPC even tho there the same.

Also where did you find this 80th percentile stat?

https://www.nbme.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/CBSE_SIG_2022.pdf

Page 3/6

 

[carabelliscusp]

https://www.nbme.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/CBSE_SIG_2022.pdf

Page 3/6

Isn't this amongst primarily med students?

 

[IndifferentOsteoblast]

Isn't this amongst primarily med students?

Probably, but who really knows though

 

[ToothJockey]

Isn't this amongst primarily med students?

Yes and generally most med students take the CBSE before dedicated so they score low on it.

I'd expect 80th percentile for OMFS applicants to be higher than that, considering this is our Step 1.

 

[Teeth and Titanite]

Yes and generally most med students take the CBSE before dedicated so they score low on it.

I'd expect 80th percentile for OMFS applicants to be higher than that, considering this is our Step 1.

It is our Step 1, but the disadvantages we face in preparing for it prevent many applicants from maximizing their score.

 

[ToothJockey]

https://www.joms.org/article/S0278-2391(22)00978-8/fulltext

Look at table 2. Mean score is 60 with old two digit scale (2021) with standard deviation of 11. Meaning anyone who scores 71+ score better than 84% of scores reported from CBSE to AAOMS. So a 74 is probably closer to 90th percentile of scores reported to AAOMS

Is this for dental students only or does it include all CBSE scores?

Also important to note that even DA requires CBSE now I believe so that adds another pool of students not applying for OMFS. Plus many dental students take the CBSE multiple times. They might score a 50 first time and then score a 75+ second time. This will skew the average downwards, especially if students take the test multiple times before achieving the score they will apply with. And then most of those that score low may not even apply to OMFS due to their low score.

I'd be interested to see the stats of OMFS applicants specifically, not CBSE test takers.

 

[IndifferentOsteoblast]

Is this for dental students only or does it include all CBSE scores?

Also important to note that even DA requires CBSE now I believe so that adds another pool of students not applying for OMFS. Plus many dental students take the CBSE multiple times. They might score a 50 first time and then score a 75+ second time. This will skew the average downwards, especially if students take the test multiple times before achieving the score they will apply with. And then most of those that score low may not even apply to OMFS due to their low score.

I'd be interested to see the stats of OMFS applicants specifically, not CBSE test takers.

The figures they shared are directly from AAOMS, so probably only omfs. They have all the cbse stats because you register through their website. Either way, your equated percent correct score is calculated based on a cohort of 2020 medical school students

 

[carabelliscusp]

You're right there is no way to know if someone is a first time examiner or a retake. If the exam can be skewed by first time takers can't it also be skewed by people who are retaking it and score higher? Some people may score worse the second time around. And the link I cited is OMFS only.

Kind of blows my mind that the mean applicant has a 60 and top 16% has a 71 on the old scale. That's clearly the best available data since it's from the AAOMS but still.

 

[ToothJockey]

You're right there is no way to know if someone is a first time examiner or a retake. If the exam can be skewed by first time takers can't it also be skewed by people who are retaking it and score higher? Some people may score worse the second time around. And the link I cited is OMFS only.

No the higher score is not a skew because that is the score they are applying with. The lower score is the skew because it isn't the score they are applying with.

Perhaps "skew" is not the right word here. Rather what I mean is the average looks lower because it includes people's first attempts which isn't the score they will be applying with.

The original point was on the percentiles of OMFS applicants. You really believe 50% of OMFS applicants are applying with <60 CBSE's?

 

[DMD12345]

I don't think it's fair to assume just because someone retakes the exam they will improve their score. They may have even scored well and tried to do better but did worse the second time. I believe many applicants have no choice to apply with a score that low, because it's the best they could do and accept that if they don't match they will do a non-cat year and reapply the next cycle. Some schools publicly post the minimum score they will consider for interview which I have seen to be 58 EPC/ 159.

I hope the average person doesn't do worse after 6 more months of studying

 

[ToothJockey]

I don't think it's fair to assume just because someone retakes the exam they will improve their score. They may have even scored well and tried to do better but did worse the second time. I believe many applicants have no choice to apply with a score that low, because it's the best they could do and accept that if they don't match they will do a non-cat year and reapply the next cycle. Some schools publicly post the minimum score they will consider for interview which I have seen to be 58 EPC/ 159.

Even if they did worse the second time (unlikely), they would be applying with the higher of their 2 scores so their worse score will still skew the overall average down even more.

I'm not saying people don't apply with a sub 60 score, I'm doubting that 50% of applicants have <60 scores. I'm guessing it's closer to 25%, and the 50 percentile mark is probably a bit under 70. Just to clarify I'm going by old scores because the link you shared was based on old scores.

If we're talking EPC, then I could see 60 EPC being somewhat close to the average applicant as that translates to 67 on the old scale.

 

[klownzo]

Take it as early as you can. If you can swing it, take it in August. You would be chilling until you apply and prob get to do more OS stuff in school if you have a solid score. It'll also make some of your classes super easy with your knowledge. Only downside to studying that early is if you match to an MD program that has you take step 1 before you start residency since you would have to relearn it all. Get it out of the way

 

[BlackThought]

Admittedly, I haven't read through this entire thread, but it's evident that a significant portion of it revolves around the CBSE. I understand the significance placed on the CBSE when it comes to the application to OMFS, but I firmly believe that this exam has grown larger than its original intent. While a certain score can somewhat predict an applicant's ability to pass Step 1, it holds very little merit beyond that. In my opinion, an applicant with a score of 70 should be considered on par with an applicant who scored 99 in terms of their overall application. Imposing strict cutoffs from the perspective of program directors is not helpful, although I understand their rationale for doing so. I apologize for rambling, but discussions about the CBSE always ignite my thoughts. The application process is far from perfect; however, it currently remains our best option. Hopefully, someone more insightful than me can devise a superior measure for OMFS applications in the near future. Best of luck.

 

[DMD12345]

Admittedly, I haven't read through this entire thread, but it's evident that a significant portion of it revolves around the CBSE. I understand the significance placed on the CBSE when it comes to the application to OMFS, but I firmly believe that this exam has grown larger than its original intent. While a certain score can somewhat predict an applicant's ability to pass Step 1, it holds very little merit beyond that. In my opinion, an applicant with a score of 70 should be considered on par with an applicant who scored 99 in terms of their overall application. Imposing strict cutoffs from the perspective of program directors is not helpful, although I understand their rationale for doing so. I apologize for rambling, but discussions about the CBSE always ignite my thoughts. The application process is far from perfect; however, it currently remains our best option. Hopefully, someone more insightful than me can devise a superior measure for OMFS applications in the near future. Best of luck.

Would you say the same for the SAT and DAT and their respective schools? How about class rank? My opinion is the numbers also speak to the hard work put in and character. Interesting topic

 

[BlackThought]

Would you say the same for the SAT and DAT and their respective schools? How about class rank? My opinion is the numbers also speak to the hard work put in and character. Interesting topic

Hard work, sure.
Character, no way.

While hard work is certainly important, it's crucial to recognize that it doesn't necessarily reflect one's character. Assuming that a higher score is an accurate indicator of an individual's character or the caliber of resident they will become is a perilous misconception. The purpose of interviews is to evaluate character; however, in my opinion, they often come across as disingenuous. During the interview process, everyone, including applicants, residents, attendings, program directors, and chairs, tends to put on a façade. It becomes a performance on interview day. As challenging as externships may be for dental students, that's when you truly get a genuine glimpse into the true nature of the people in each respective program. This is just my opinion on things.

 

[D1Bound]

Hard work, sure.
Character, no way.

While hard work is certainly important, it's crucial to recognize that it doesn't necessarily reflect one's character. Assuming that a higher score is an accurate indicator of an individual's character or the caliber of resident they will become is a perilous misconception. The purpose of interviews is to evaluate character; however, in my opinion, they often come across as disingenuous. During the interview process, everyone, including applicants, residents, attendings, program directors, and chairs, tends to put on a façade. It becomes a performance on interview day. As challenging as externships may be for dental students, that's when you truly get a genuine glimpse into the true nature of the people in each respective program. This is just my opinion on things.

I would say that hard work cannot be measured by rank or CBSE. Those things do not prove if a student can physically labor the hours that are required in residency.

 

[Teeth and Titanite]

I would say that hard work cannot be measured by rank or CBSE. Those things do not prove if a student can physically labor the hours that are required in residency.

To be fair, med students are not really pushed to physical limits either to determine if they can become surgeons.

 

[DMD12345]

Hard work, sure.
Character, no way.

While hard work is certainly important, it's crucial to recognize that it doesn't necessarily reflect one's character. Assuming that a higher score is an accurate indicator of an individual's character or the caliber of resident they will become is a perilous misconception. The purpose of interviews is to evaluate character; however, in my opinion, they often come across as disingenuous. During the interview process, everyone, including applicants, residents, attendings, program directors, and chairs, tends to put on a façade. It becomes a performance on interview day. As challenging as externships may be for dental students, that's when you truly get a genuine glimpse into the true nature of the people in each respective program. This is just my opinion on things.

Good points. Probably why LORs and externships hold a lot of weight, but like you said, even those the applicant wasn’t 100% their real selves with. I can see your argument for putting less weight on the cbse and more focus on the application as a whole to really hone in on character. Seems tough to accurately do. Wish we had more time for longer externships and interviews

 

[ToothJockey]

Personally, I would rather OMFS admissions depend primarily on CBSE/rank rather than other factors like LORs, interviews, extracurriculars, prestige of your dental school etc.

In my opinion its the best metric to evaluate whether a student will make a good surgeon. If someone is particularly good at kissing butt, they will get good LOR's and do well in interviews. That doesn't mean they will be a good surgeon. CBSE/rank atleast tells you a student is intelligent and hard working, which also doesn't guarantee they will make a good surgeon but greatly increases the chances of it.

 

[IndifferentOsteoblast]

Personally, I would rather OMFS admissions depend primarily on CBSE/rank rather than other factors like LORs, interviews, extracurriculars, prestige of your dental school etc.

In my opinion its the best metric to evaluate whether a student will make a good surgeon. If someone is particularly good at kissing butt, they will get good LOR's and do well in interviews. That doesn't mean they will be a good surgeon. CBSE/rank atleast tells you a student is intelligent and hard working, which also doesn't guarantee they will make a good surgeon but greatly increases the chances of it.

No faculty member is going to give a LOR to a student they don’t see fit for residency. I wouldn’t devalue them by spreading the misconception that they’re just giving them out to anyone interested in omfs and sucking up to them. LORs are earned, and they hold more weight than you say

 

[yappy]

Personally, I would rather OMFS admissions depend primarily on CBSE/rank rather than other factors like LORs, interviews, extracurriculars, prestige of your dental school etc.

In my opinion its the best metric to evaluate whether a student will make a good surgeon. If someone is particularly good at kissing butt, they will get good LOR's and do well in interviews. That doesn't mean they will be a good surgeon. CBSE/rank atleast tells you a student is intelligent and hard working, which also doesn't guarantee they will make a good surgeon but greatly increases the chances of it.

I think most people who graduate from an accredited residency are good. Most of the metrics for evaluation have to do with selection and not success. Simply put, there are too few spots and too many applicants.

 

[ToothJockey]

No faculty member is going to give a LOR to a student they don’t see fit for residency. I wouldn’t devalue them by spreading the misconception that they’re just giving them out to anyone interested in omfs and sucking up to them. LORs are earned, and they hold more weight than you say

I simply believe LOR's are subject to a lot more bias than CBSE. Example: Maybe your LOR writers know your father who is a practicing OMFS. Even the most ethical doctors can fall prey to unintentional nepotism. Would that LOR be "glowing" the same way for a student without any "connections"?

CBSE don't lie. People do...

 

[odontogenesis]

OMFS is a very small world… if you’re under the impression that people aren’t making phone calls to the authors of these LORs you’re mistaken. I’ve been told they take the initiative to call and ask “alright what do you really think about this person” and they’ll discuss… especially if they initially liked you. Obviously that has the potential to go south quickly if your referee used a generic template when writing your LOR and during said phone call they say so you have a poor attitude and they wouldn’t want to work with you everyday for 4-6 years.

It’s been said a million times on here by residents and PDs… CBSE gets your foot in the door.. that’s it. Attitude, being someone people want to hangout and work with, not being an arrogant POS, strong willingness to be humble and learn, etc. all carry the rest of the way.

Plenty of dbags with 90+ CBSE don’t match and their humble classmate with a 70 and a great attitude match.

 

[Teeth and Titanite]

Plenty of dbags with 90+ CBSE don’t match

I have a hard time believing this is true. Probably only a handful of 90+ CBSEs in a cycle.

 

[We'reAllGonnaMakeIt]

I have a hard time believing this is true. Probably only a handful of 90+ CBSEs in a cycle.

He was obviously exaggerating, his point still stands, you get filtered out if you have a ****ty attitude regardless of score