usmle-error-analysis
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
当用户完成 USMLE 练习题后需要分析错题、定位薄弱知识点、制定针对性复习策略时使用。输入错题信息(科目、考点、错误原因),输出错误分类、薄弱知识点清单、针对性复习建议。
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- ebbinghaus-reviewSkill
- english-readingSkill
- error-analysisSkill
- exam-prep-templateSkill
- medical-mnemonicSkill
- review-plannerSkill
- usmle-review-plannerSkill
- west-med-quizSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 104
UWorld is gold standard: Do all questions timed, review explanations for both right and wrong answers
- Distinctive: line 105
Track error patterns: If same topic appears 3+ times, it's a genuine knowledge gap, not bad luck
- Distinctive: line 108
Review within 24 hours: Don't let errors pile up, review same day if possible
- Distinctive: line 110
Anki flashcards: Create cards for missed concepts, review daily
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
USMLE Error Analysis
Purpose
Analyze USMLE practice question errors, categorize mistake types, identify weak knowledge areas, and generate targeted review strategies. Turn "I got it wrong" into "Here's exactly what I need to fix."
Input (User Provides)
- Question subject/system (e.g., Cardiovascular, Renal, Psychiatry)
- Question topic/concept (e.g., Heart Failure, Glomerulonephritis, Schizophrenia)
- User's answer vs correct answer
- Self-identified reason for error (if known):
- Knowledge gap (didn't know the concept)
- Misread question (misunderstood what was being asked)
- Careless mistake (knew it but picked wrong answer)
- Time pressure (rushed and guessed)
- Second-guessed (changed correct answer to wrong one)
Execution Steps
- Categorize each error into one of 5 types:
- Knowledge Gap: Fundamental concept not understood → Content review needed
- Question Misread: Misunderstood stem or what was asked → Slow down, underline key phrases
- Careless Error: Knew concept but made silly mistake → Develop checklist habits
- Time Pressure: Ran out of time, guessed → Practice timed blocks, improve speed
- Second-Guessing: Changed right answer to wrong one → Trust first instinct, document why
- Identify weak knowledge areas by system/topic:
- Track error frequency per system (e.g., Cardiovascular: 8 errors, Renal: 5 errors)
- Track error frequency per topic within system (e.g., within Cardio: Heart Failure 4, Arrhythmia 3)
- Prioritize: High error count + high-yield topic = urgent review
- Generate targeted review plan:
- For Knowledge Gaps: Specific content review (e.g., "Review First Aid Cardio pages 280-295, do 20 UWorld questions on Heart Failure")
- For Misread/Careless: Process improvement (e.g., "Underline 'most likely' vs 'best initial' vs 'gold standard'")
- For Time Pressure: Timed practice strategy (e.g., "Do 40-question blocks timed at 1 min/question")
- For Second-Guessing: Confidence building (e.g., "Document why you chose initial answer before changing")
- Output actionable next steps:
- Today's review tasks (specific pages, specific questions)
- This week's focus areas (which systems to prioritize)
- Process improvements (how to avoid same mistake type)
Output Format
Error Summary Table
| Date | System | Topic | Error Type | Action Needed |
| 2026-08-27 | Cardio | Heart Failure | Knowledge Gap | Review FA p280-285, do 20 UW questions |
| 2026-08-27 | Renal | Glomerulonephritis | Misread | Practice identifying "best initial" vs "most accurate" |
Weak Area Priority List
- Cardiovascular - Heart Failure (4 errors, high-yield) → Urgent review
- Renal - Glomerulonephritis (3 errors, medium-yield) → Review this week
- Psychiatry - Schizophrenia (2 errors, high-yield) → Review next week
Targeted Action Plan
- Today: Review Heart Failure pathophysiology (First Aid p280-285), do 20 UWorld Heart Failure questions
- This week: Complete Renal physiology review, focus on nephron anatomy and diuretic mechanisms
- Process improvement: For every question, underline "most likely" / "best initial" / "gold standard" before answering
2026 Exam Format (IMPORTANT)
Starting May 2026:
- Step 1: 14 blocks × 30 min (was 8 × 60 min) — Pass/Fail
- Step 2 CK: 16 blocks × 30 min (was 8 × 60 min) — Scored (passing = 218)
- Step 3: Two days, includes 13-14 CCS cases
Implications for error analysis:
- Shorter blocks mean less endurance fatigue but faster pacing required
- More frequent transitions = more opportunities for "reset" errors
- Time pressure errors may increase with 30-min blocks vs 60-min blocks
USMLE-Specific Error Patterns
Step 1 Common Errors
- Biochemistry: Enzyme deficiencies, metabolic pathways, vitamin cofactors
- Physiology: Pressure-volume loops, cardiac output calculations, renal clearance
- Pathology: Classic histology findings, tumor markers, genetic associations
- Pharmacology: Mechanism of action, side effects, drug interactions
- Microbiology: Organism characteristics, treatment of choice, virulence factors
Step 2 CK Common Errors
- Internal Medicine: Next best step in management, diagnostic workup sequences
- Surgery: Indications for surgery vs conservative management, post-op complications
- Pediatrics: Developmental milestones, vaccination schedules, congenital conditions
- OB/GYN: Prenatal screening, labor management, contraceptive counseling
- Psychiatry: Medication side effects, suicide risk assessment, capacity evaluation
Question Stem Keywords
- "Most likely": Common presentation, don't overthink
- "Best initial": First step in workup/management
- "Most accurate": Gold standard diagnostic test
- "Next best step": What to do after current intervention
- "Definitive treatment": Final treatment, not temporizing measure
Notes
- UWorld is gold standard: Do all questions timed, review explanations for both right and wrong answers
- Track error patterns: If same topic appears 3+ times, it's a genuine knowledge gap, not bad luck
- High-yield > Low-yield: Prioritize common conditions over rare zebras
- Process matters: Many errors are not knowledge gaps but test-taking strategy issues
- Review within 24 hours: Don't let errors pile up, review same day if possible
- Amboss articles: Great for quick content review when you identify a knowledge gap
- Anki flashcards: Create cards for missed concepts, review daily
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

