NBME 23 99% (NBME Answers)

Retired NBME 23 Answers

nbme23/Block 4/Question#10 (reveal difficulty score)
A study was conducted to investigate the mean ...
99% 🔍 / 📺 / 🌳 / 📖
tags:

+44 upvote downvote
submitted by ∗yotsubato(1208)

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

Was it just me, or did "age at onset in years" appear RIGHT above the number of patients, rather than the mean. Which confused me for a good 3 minutes.

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

fulminant_life Definitely was the same for me. I was so confused for like 5 mins +21

d_holles dude i almost didn't get the question bc of this ... i thought the age of onset was the actual age of onset (36) +9

mellowpenguins Are you serious. NBME strikes again with shitty formatting. +10

yex OMG!! Now I just realized that. Super confused and also thought onset of age was 36. :-/ +8

monkey what is 36 supposed to be? +1

thomasburton Think the number of people in that group +5

paulkarr Yup...was looking at it for a good 3 min before just doing the "fuck it..it's gotta be 99" +6

arcanumm Age of Onset is the Title of the table, which I didn't figure out until after exam was over. What terrible formatting. +4

veryhungrycaterpillar This is straight up tatti. I was like what muscular dystrophy is showing up with an almost biphasic age of onset between adolescence and 30s? Fucked it up. +

handsome how did you get the 99 what is your solution ? hehe +

+7 upvote downvote
submitted by ∗mcl(671)

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

This figure is a helpful refresher for the 68/95/99.7 rule

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

+4 upvote downvote
submitted by ∗fulminant_life(109)

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

Why is it 99% and not 95%? It asked for onset of disease at less than 9 years of age. I'm clearly missing something here

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

cbrodo @fulminant_life because the mean age is 3.8 with a standard deviation of 1.8. An age of onset of 9 years is nearly 3 standard deviations above the mean. Therefore, since we know +/- 2 SD covers 95% of the bell curve, it must be higher than that. The only option higher than 95% is 99%. +10

charcot_bouchard Yes 9.2 was the upper limit for 99% CI. I picked 95 first because i thought 2.5% would be out of this range. But changed ans because it should be less than 2.5% because 9.2 is so close to 9. Also they are asking CLOSEST to which of the following? +5

aakb I see what you are saying but you have to remember to add the things on the right side to include all the values under 9. So even if you go with the 2 standard deviations for 95%, youd have to add 2.5% that's on the left. which would be 97.5 and you know you would still add more on the left to get to 9 years of age so it would have to be closer to 99% than to 95%. hope that helps +

+0 upvote downvote
submitted by ∗jacobg456(1)

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

This question was messed up for me and I couldnt even understand what it was saying lol.

get full access to all content ⋅ pick a username

Must-See Comments from nbme23

ferrero on Precapillary resistance
yotsubato on 99%
sne on Triglyceride
sajaqua1 on Area labeled ‘D’ (Spinothalamic tract, right)
stinkysulfaeggs on Hypoglycemia
hayayah on Iris
soph on Peak inspiratory pressure (alveolar): ...
seagull on Area labeled ‘C’ (Cranial nerve 8: ...
water on Dietary change
wired-in on 28.8
beeip on Binding of permeable ligand to nuclear ...
thomasalterman on Hypoglycemia
yotsubato on Inhibition of the cytochrome P450-dependent ...
seagull on Decreased sodium bicarbonate reabsorption in ...