Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the institution of a structured board review program is associated with improved in-service examination scores by residents at an emergency medicine (EM) residency program. METHODS: A retrospective, historical control analysis of the association of a board review program and in-service examination scores at one EM residency program was performed. A structured board review consisting of monthly reading assignments in "classic" EM textbooks followed by a graded multiple-choice written examination was instituted in 1987. Percentile scores on the American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) in-service examination before (1985-1986) and after (1987-1994) initiation of the board review process were compared by resident level (EM-1, 2, or 3). RESULTS: The EM-1 mean percentile score before review was 50.7 and rose to 68.9 after the institution of the board review program (p = 0.039). Mean EM-2 scores (66.8 vs 65.4) and EM-3 scores (74.4 vs 67.4) decreased slightly; these decreases were not statistically significant. Due to the large increase in EM-1 scores, the mean scores for the total program increased slightly (63.4 vs 67.4; p = NS). CONCLUSION: In this study, EM-1 in-service scores improved in association with the institution of a structured board review program. This formalized didactic program may increase the knowledge base and test performance of EM-1 residents. A favorable effect on EM-2 and EM-3 resident scores was not seen.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James Gillen (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: