Literature DB >> 19104765

[Quality improvement of multiple choice examinations: in psychiatry, psychosomatic medicine, psychotherapy, and neurology].

M Weih1, D Harms, C Rauch, L Segarra, U Reulbach, U Degirmenci, M de Zwaan, S Schwab, J Kornhuber.   

Abstract

We describe a continuous improvement process in planning, performance, and evaluation of multiple choice examination questions in psychiatry, neurology, psychosomatic medicine, and psychotherapy. We analyzed 640 multiple choice questions of 1,419 students during a period of 4 years. Crucial changes concerned the abolishment of problematic question types, implementation of validated new question formats, extension of case-based questions, elongation of question stems, quantitative evaluation of item difficulty, discriminatory value, and the introduction of a peer review system. Consequences of these improvements were greater item difficulty (average 18%) and discriminatory value (average 67%) and reduced post hoc analysis times. Introduction of peer reviews resulted in longer preparation time, which was however appreciated by the peers due to a clear improvement in item quality.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19104765     DOI: 10.1007/s00115-008-2618-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nervenarzt        ISSN: 0028-2804            Impact factor:   1.214


  2 in total

1.  Comparison of items in five-option and extended-matching formats for assessment of diagnostic skills.

Authors:  S M Case; D B Swanson; D R Ripkey
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 6.893

2.  The impact of two multiple-choice question formats on the problem-solving strategies used by novices and experts.

Authors:  Sylvain P Coderre; Peter Harasym; Henry Mandin; Gordon Fick
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2004-11-05       Impact factor: 2.463

  2 in total
  2 in total

1.  [The quality of university teaching in psychiatry and psychotherapy: results of a survey on the current status following the introduction of the new medical accreditation system].

Authors:  M Weih; J Kornhuber; F Hohagen; U Voderholzer
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.214

2.  Comparison of collegial individual and group reviews of general practice multiple choice questions.

Authors:  Klaus Böhme; Jörg Schelling; Irmgard Streitlein-Böhme; Katharina Glassen; Jeannine Schübel; Jana Jünger
Journal:  GMS Z Med Ausbild       Date:  2012-08-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.