Number
220
Name
Evaluating the Influence of External Learning Resources on CBSE Scores Among Pre-clerkship Medical Learners
Date & Time
Sunday, June 7, 2026, 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM
Location Name
Oglethorpe Ballroom
Speakers
Authors
Yash Patel, Medical College of Georgia
Arthur Yu, Medical College of Georgia
Shilpa Brown, Medical College of Georgia
Lynne Coule, Medical College of Georgia
Wanda Jirau-Rosaly, Medical College of Georgia
Nicole Rockich-Winston, Medical College of Georgia
Presentation Topic(s)
Curriculum
Description
PURPOSE
This study explores whether pre-clerkship students who rely primarily on
third-party learning tools attain higher NBME Comprehensive Basic Science
Examination (CBSE) scores compared to peers who study mainly with
institution-developed curricular materials. Since the USMLE Step 1 became
pass/fail in 2022, students have increasingly pivoted toward external study
aids, but limited research has evaluated whether this trend improves board
exam preparedness.
METHODS
An anonymous survey was administered to second-year students at the Medical
College of Georgia to collect information on their predominant study method,
CBSE results, and perceived test effort. Participants reporting low effort
were removed from analysis. CBSE score variations among resource groups were
assessed with ANOVA and subsequent Welch’s t-tests.
RESULTS
Seventy-seven students responded, and 65 were included in the analysis
after excluding low-effort respondents. Students who primarily used
third-party resources had higher average CBSE scores, though the difference
was not statistically significant. Mean scores were 57.0% ± 10.1 for
third-party users (n = 45), 54.1% ± 7.1 for in-person lecture attendees (n =
11), and 51.3% ± 7.3 for recorded lecture viewers (n = 9). ANOVA showed no
significant differences among the three groups (F(2,62) = 1.61, p = 0.21).
Combining both lecture groups yielded a similar trend favoring third-party
users (57.0% ± 10.1 vs. 52.9% ± 7.2; p = 0.06).
CONCLUSION
Although students who relied on third-party resources scored higher on the
CBSE, the difference was not statistically significant. The study’s
dependence on self-reported, voluntary responses introduces the possibility
of bias, and results drawn from one institution may not extend to other
settings. As students increasingly turn to external learning tools, medical
schools should consider how their curricula and assessments can better align
with evolving study behaviors.
This study explores whether pre-clerkship students who rely primarily on
third-party learning tools attain higher NBME Comprehensive Basic Science
Examination (CBSE) scores compared to peers who study mainly with
institution-developed curricular materials. Since the USMLE Step 1 became
pass/fail in 2022, students have increasingly pivoted toward external study
aids, but limited research has evaluated whether this trend improves board
exam preparedness.
METHODS
An anonymous survey was administered to second-year students at the Medical
College of Georgia to collect information on their predominant study method,
CBSE results, and perceived test effort. Participants reporting low effort
were removed from analysis. CBSE score variations among resource groups were
assessed with ANOVA and subsequent Welch’s t-tests.
RESULTS
Seventy-seven students responded, and 65 were included in the analysis
after excluding low-effort respondents. Students who primarily used
third-party resources had higher average CBSE scores, though the difference
was not statistically significant. Mean scores were 57.0% ± 10.1 for
third-party users (n = 45), 54.1% ± 7.1 for in-person lecture attendees (n =
11), and 51.3% ± 7.3 for recorded lecture viewers (n = 9). ANOVA showed no
significant differences among the three groups (F(2,62) = 1.61, p = 0.21).
Combining both lecture groups yielded a similar trend favoring third-party
users (57.0% ± 10.1 vs. 52.9% ± 7.2; p = 0.06).
CONCLUSION
Although students who relied on third-party resources scored higher on the
CBSE, the difference was not statistically significant. The study’s
dependence on self-reported, voluntary responses introduces the possibility
of bias, and results drawn from one institution may not extend to other
settings. As students increasingly turn to external learning tools, medical
schools should consider how their curricula and assessments can better align
with evolving study behaviors.
Presentation Tag(s)
Student Presentation