MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155877991 · doi:10.2196/25903

The United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 2 Clinical Skills Examination: Potential Alternatives During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021· article· en· W3155877991 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rawish Fatima, Ahmad R Assaly, Muhammad Aziz, Ragheb Assaly

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationMedical educationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)United States Medical Licensing ExaminationGraduate medical educationPandemicMatching (statistics)Medical schoolPsychologyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We feel that the current COVID-19 crisis has created great uncertainty and anxiety among medical students. With medical school classes initially being conducted on the web and the approaching season of "the Match" (a uniform system by which residency candidates and residency programs in the United States simultaneously "match" with the aid of a computer algorithm to fill first-year and second-year postgraduate training positions accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education), the situation did not seem to be improving. The National Resident Matching Program made an official announcement on May 26, 2020, that candidates would not be required to take or pass the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) examination to participate in the Match. On January 26, 2021, formal discontinuation of Step 2 CS was announced; for this reason, we have provided our perspective of possible alternative solutions to the Step 2 CS examination. A successful alternative model can be implemented in future residency match seasons as well.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0090.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.393 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207