195 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17001136)
1. Psychometric characteristics and response times for content-parallel extended-matching and one-best-answer items in relation to number of options.
Swanson DB; Holtzman KZ; Allbee K; Clauser BE
Acad Med; 2006 Oct; 81(10 Suppl):S52-5. PubMed ID: 17001136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Measurement characteristics of content-parallel single-best-answer and extended-matching questions in relation to number and source of options.
Swanson DB; Holtzman KZ; Allbee K
Acad Med; 2008 Oct; 83(10 Suppl):S21-4. PubMed ID: 18820493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Psychometric characteristics and response times for one-best-answer questions in relation to number and source of options.
Swanson DB; Holtzman KZ; Clauser BE; Sawhill AJ
Acad Med; 2005 Oct; 80(10 Suppl):S93-6. PubMed ID: 16199468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Use of multimedia on the step 1 and step 2 clinical knowledge components of USMLE: a controlled trial of the impact on item characteristics.
Holtzman KZ; Swanson DB; Ouyang W; Hussie K; Allbee K
Acad Med; 2009 Oct; 84(10 Suppl):S90-3. PubMed ID: 19907397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Multiple choice questions: a literature review on the optimal number of options.
Vyas R; Supe A
Natl Med J India; 2008; 21(3):130-3. PubMed ID: 19004145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of the psychometric properties of three- and four-option multiple-choice questions in nursing assessments.
Tarrant M; Ware J
Nurse Educ Today; 2010 Aug; 30(6):539-43. PubMed ID: 20053488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Retention of basic science information by senior medical students.
Ling Y; Swanson DB; Holtzman K; Bucak SD
Acad Med; 2008 Oct; 83(10 Suppl):S82-5. PubMed ID: 18820508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Efficiency analysis of two written short-answer student evaluation formats.
Stratford PW
Phys Ther; 1988 Oct; 68(10):1546-9. PubMed ID: 3174836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Reducing the number of options on multiple-choice questions: response time, psychometrics and standard setting.
Schneid SD; Armour C; Park YS; Yudkowsky R; Bordage G
Med Educ; 2014 Oct; 48(10):1020-7. PubMed ID: 25200022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: the consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education.
Downing SM
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2005; 10(2):133-43. PubMed ID: 16078098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating diagnostic pattern recognition: the psychometric characteristics of a new item format.
Case SM; Swanson DB; Stillman PL
Res Med Educ; 1988; 27():3-8. PubMed ID: 3218869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessment of medical knowledge: the pros and cons of using true/false multiple choice questions.
Chandratilake M; Davis M; Ponnamperuma G
Natl Med J India; 2011; 24(4):225-8. PubMed ID: 22208143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Using Automatic Item Generation to Improve the Quality of MCQ Distractors.
Lai H; Gierl MJ; Touchie C; Pugh D; Boulais AP; De Champlain A
Teach Learn Med; 2016; 28(2):166-73. PubMed ID: 26849247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The reduced Impact of Psoriasis Questionnaire has good psychometric properties in Italian patients.
Nijsten T; Sampogna F; Stern RS; Abeni D
Dermatology; 2007; 215(4):348-51. PubMed ID: 17911994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. F-type testlets and the effects of feedback and case-specificity.
Baldwin P; Baldwin SG; Haist SA
Acad Med; 2011 Oct; 86(10 Suppl):S55-8; quiz S58. PubMed ID: 21955770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Quality assurance of item writing: during the introduction of multiple choice questions in medicine for high stakes examinations.
Ware J; Vik T
Med Teach; 2009 Mar; 31(3):238-43. PubMed ID: 18825568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison between three option, four option and five option multiple choice question tests for quality parameters: A randomized study.
Vegada B; Shukla A; Khilnani A; Charan J; Desai C
Indian J Pharmacol; 2016; 48(5):571-575. PubMed ID: 27721545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of item-writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievement in high-stakes nursing assessments.
Tarrant M; Ware J
Med Educ; 2008 Feb; 42(2):198-206. PubMed ID: 18230093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Psychometrics of Multiple Choice Questions with Non-Functioning Distracters: Implications to Medical Education.
Deepak KK; Al-Umran KU; AI-Sheikh MH; Dkoli BV; Al-Rubaish A
Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 2015; 59(4):428-35. PubMed ID: 27530011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The effect of item pool restriction on the precision of ability measurement for a Rasch-based CAT: comparisons to traditional fixed length examinations.
Halkitis PN
J Outcome Meas; 1998; 2(2):97-122. PubMed ID: 9661734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
