Correlation between an email based board review program and American Board of Pediatrics General Pediatrics Certifying Examination scores

• Published in: Medical education online Vol. 14; p. 18
• Main Authors: Langenau, Erik E, Fogel, Joshua, Schaeffer, Henry A
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Medical Education Online 09-11-2009
• Subjects: Adult; Certification - methods; Certification - standards; Educational Measurement - methods; Educational Measurement - standards; Electronic Mail; Female; Foreign Medical Graduates; Humans; Internship and Residency - methods; Male; New York City; Pediatrics - education; Pediatrics - methods; Pediatrics - standards; Program Evaluation; New York City; Pediatrics; Email; Board Review; Board Certification Exam
• ISSN: 1087-2981; 1087-2981
• DOI: 10.3885/meo.2009.res00321

To investigate the impact of a weekly email based board review course on individual resident performance on the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP) General Pediatrics Certifying Examination for pediatric residents and, specifically, residents with low ABP In-training Examination (ITE) scores.
Weekly board-type questions were emailed to all pediatric residents from 2004-2007. Responses to board-type questions were tracked, recorded, and correlated with ITE scores and ABP General Pediatrics Certifying Examination Scores.
With regard to total number of questions answered, only total number of questions answered correctly had a significant positive correlation with standard board scores (n = 71, r = 0.24, p = 0.047). For "at risk" residents with ITE scores <or= 200 (n = 21), number of questions answered in PL 3 year (r = 0.51, p = 0.018) and number of questions answered correctly for all PL years (r = 0.59, p = 0.005) had significant positive correlations with standard board scores.
Participating regularly in the email-based board review course, answering board style questions, and answering correctly to board style questions were associated with higher standard board scores. This benefit existed for all but was especially prominent among those with poor in-training examination scores.