Literature DB >> 18825568

Quality assurance of item writing: during the introduction of multiple choice questions in medicine for high stakes examinations.

James Ware1, Torstein Vik.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One Norwegian medical school introduced A-type MCQs (best one of five) to replace more traditional assessment formats (e.g. essays) in an undergraduate medical curriculum. Quality assurance criteria were introduced to measure the success of the intervention.
METHOD: Data collection from the first four year-end examinations included item analysis, frequency of item writing flaws (IWF) and proportion of items testing at a higher cognitive level (K2). All examinations were reviewed before after delivery and no items were removed.
RESULTS: Overall pass rates were similar to previous cohorts examined with traditional assessment formats. Across 389 items, the proportion of items with >or=5% of candidates marking two or more functioning distracters was >or=47.5%. Removal of items with high p-values (>or=85%), this item distracter proportion became >75%. With each successive year in the curriculum the proportion of K2 items used rose steadily to almost 50%. 31/389 (7%) items had IWFs. 65% items had a discriminatory power, >or=0.15.
CONCLUSIONS: Five item quality criteria are recommended: (1) adherence to an in-house style, (2) item proportion testing at K2 level, (3) functioning distracter proportion, (4) overall discrimination ratio and (5) IWF frequency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 18825568     DOI: 10.1080/01421590802155597

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Teach        ISSN: 0142-159X            Impact factor:   3.650


  6 in total

1.  Effects of question formats on student and item performance.

Authors:  David J Caldwell; Adam N Pate
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  Rarely selected distractors in high stakes medical multiple-choice examinations and their recognition by item authors: a simulation and survey.

Authors:  Anja Rogausch; Rainer Hofer; René Krebs
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 2.463

3.  Pattern recognition as a concept for multiple-choice questions in a national licensing exam.

Authors:  Tilo Freiwald; Madjid Salimi; Ehsan Khaljani; Sigrid Harendza
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 2.463

4.  A comparison of clinical-scenario (case cluster) versus stand-alone multiple choice questions in a problem-based learning environment in undergraduate medicine.

Authors:  Sehlule Vuma; Bidyadhar Sa
Journal:  J Taibah Univ Med Sci       Date:  2016-11-11

5.  How important is distractor efficiency for grading Best Answer Questions?

Authors:  Thomas Puthiaparampil; Mizanur Rahman
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  Adding to the debate on the numbers of options for MCQs: the case for not being limited to MCQs with three, four or five options.

Authors:  Mike Tweed
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2019-09-14       Impact factor: 2.463

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.