The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validity of the Medical College Admission Test for Predicting Medical School Performance
Abstract
PURPOSE: Since the introduction of the revised Medical College Admission Test (MCAT(R)) in 1991, the Association of American Medical Colleges has been investigating the extent to which MCAT scores supplement the power of undergraduate grade point averages (uGPAs) to predict success in medical school. This report is a comprehensive summary of the relationships between MCAT scores and (1) medical school grades, (2) United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step scores, and (3) academic distinction or difficulty. METHOD: This study followed two cohorts from entrance to medical school through residency. Students from 14 medical schools' 1992 and 1993 entering classes provided data for predicting medical school grades and academic difficulty/distinction, while their peers from all of the U.S. medical schools were used to predict performance on USMLE Steps 1, 2, and 3. Regression analyses assessed the predictive power of combinations of uGPAs, MCAT scores, and undergraduate-institution selectivity. RESULTS: Grades were best predicted by a combination of MCAT scores and uGPAs, with MCAT scores providing a substantial increment over uGPAs. MCAT scores were better predictors of USMLE Step scores than were uGPAs, and the combination did little better than MCAT scores alone. The probability of experiencing academic difficulty or distinction tended to vary with MCAT scores. MCAT scores were strong predictors of scores for all three Step examinations, particularly Step 1. CONCLUSIONS: MCAT scores almost double the proportion of variance in medical school grades explained by uGPAs, and essentially replace the need for uGPAs in their impressive prediction of Step scores. The MCAT performs well as an indicator of academic preparation for medical school, independent of the school-specific handicaps of uGPAs.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“They are good predictors for medical school GPA and USMLE scores with the MCAT often being the better predictor 13 .”
From Effect of repeated/spaced formative assessments on medical school final exam performance (2017) · cites this paper as [13]
Citations
Cites
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A. (1969) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162101 · Cited by 8,012
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2001) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.162 · Cited by 639
Evaluating the Predictive Validity of MCAT Scores across Diverse Applicant Groups
Koenig, J. A., Sireci, S. G., & Wiley, A. (1998) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-199810000-00021 · Cited by 106
Huff, K., & Fang, D. (1999) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-199904000-00047 · Cited by 88
Wiley, A., & Koenig, J. A. (1996) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-199610000-00052 · Cited by 61
Assessing the validity of the updated Medical College Admission Test
Mitchell, K. A., Haynes, R., & Koenig, J. C. (1994) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-199405000-00017 · Cited by 49
A Validity Study of the Writing Sample Section of the Medical College Admission Test
Hojat, M., Erdmann, J. B., Veloski, J. J., Nasca, T. J., Callahan, C. A., Julian, E. R., & Peck, J. (2000) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200010001-00008 · Cited by 29
Self-citationBridgeman, B., Pollack, J., & Burton, N. W. (2004) · Cited by 15
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Murayama, K. M. (2007) · Cited by 477
Standardized Tests Predict Graduate Students' Success
Kuncel, N. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1136618 · Cited by 336
Donnon, T., Paolucci, E. O., & Violato, C. (2006) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.acm.0000249878.25186.b7 · Cited by 294
Multiple mini-interviews predict clerkship and licensing examination performance
Reiter, H. I., Eva, K. W., Rosenfeld, J., & Norman, G. R. (2007) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2007.02709.x · Cited by 235
Prideaux, D. J., Roberts, C., Eva, K. W., Centeno, A., McCrorie, P., McManus, I. C., Patterson, F., POWIS, D. A., Tekian, A. S., & Wilkinson, D. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.551560 · Cited by 221
Metadata
- Authors
- Julian, E. R.
- Affiliations
- Association of American Medical Colleges (US)
- Corresponding author
- Julian, Ellen R.
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 910-917
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2032031273
- Cited by
- 319
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 12.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Medical Education and Admissions
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Keywords
- MCAT, medical school admissions, predictive validity, undergraduate grade point average, academic distinctions, academic difficulties, medical students
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Competence, College Admission Test, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Humans, Internship and Residency, Licensure, Medical, Predictive Value of Tests, Probability, School Admission Criteria, Schools, Medical, Statistics as Topic, Students, Medical, United States, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review