This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

John J. Norcini, PhD

JAMA. 1994;272(9):713-714.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In this issue of THE JOURNAL, Dawson and colleagues¹ report results of a study of the performance of men and women of various racial and ethnic backgrounds on the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Part I examination. Differences among all groups were largely explained by education and performance before medical school. However, these factors did not account fully for the NBME Part I performance of women and Asian/Pacific Islander men. If confirmed by further research, the findings imply that the examination either unintentionally assessed aspects of performance unrelated to biomedical science or women and Asian/Pacific Islander men were deficient in the content tested.

See also p 674.

Dawson et al are appropriately cautious in interpreting their results. Despite attempts to control for differences in standardized test performance by using scores on the Medical College Admission Test as well as undergraduate major, science and nonscience hours, grade point averages, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Office of the Executive Vice President, American Board of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa.

Footnotes
This Editorial does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the American Board of Internal Medicine.

Reprint requests to American Board of Internal Medicine, 3624 Market St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 (Dr Norcini).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?