Lita Aeder1, Joshua Fogel, Henry Schaeffer. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Maimonides Infants and Children's Hospital of Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY 11219, USA, lita@nyc.rr.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is a correlation between American Board of Pediatrics In-Training and General Pediatrics Certifying Examination scores. A course targeted mainly for residents "at-risk" based on in-training scores may improve the outcome of the certification exam. The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of a board review course on pediatric board certification scores, particularly for residents at-risk. METHODS: Residents "at-risk" taking the course (Yes) were compared to residents not taking the course who were not at-risk (No) as well as to a cohort of residents predating the onset of the course with mixed risk (Comparison). Analyses compared board exam scores and passing rates in the three groups and in the subcategory of residents who scored </=300 on the in-training exam in each group. RESULTS: Standard scores and pass rates were higher for the residents not at risk, middle for residents of mixed risk and lowest for residents at risk. When analyzing the subset of scores for those with in-training score of <300, the scores were higher for the residents in the course than those who never took it. Also, residents with in-training score of <300 achieved higher average point score gains when comparing the certification exam to their last in-training score. Linear regression analysis showed that not delaying board certification, third year in-training scores and taking the board review course were significantly associated with higher board certification scores. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric residents at risk for not passing their Pediatric board certification exams benefited from a board review course.
OBJECTIVE: There is a correlation between American Board of Pediatrics In-Training and General Pediatrics Certifying Examination scores. A course targeted mainly for residents "at-risk" based on in-training scores may improve the outcome of the certification exam. The objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of a board review course on pediatric board certification scores, particularly for residents at-risk. METHODS: Residents "at-risk" taking the course (Yes) were compared to residents not taking the course who were not at-risk (No) as well as to a cohort of residents predating the onset of the course with mixed risk (Comparison). Analyses compared board exam scores and passing rates in the three groups and in the subcategory of residents who scored </=300 on the in-training exam in each group. RESULTS: Standard scores and pass rates were higher for the residents not at risk, middle for residents of mixed risk and lowest for residents at risk. When analyzing the subset of scores for those with in-training score of <300, the scores were higher for the residents in the course than those who never took it. Also, residents with in-training score of <300 achieved higher average point score gains when comparing the certification exam to their last in-training score. Linear regression analysis showed that not delaying board certification, third year in-training scores and taking the board review course were significantly associated with higher board certification scores. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric residents at risk for not passing their Pediatric board certification exams benefited from a board review course.