394 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26502882)
1. Is a picture worth a thousand words: an analysis of the difficulty and discrimination parameters of illustrated vs. text-alone vignettes in histology multiple choice questions.
Holland J; O'Sullivan R; Arnett R
BMC Med Educ; 2015 Oct; 15():184. PubMed ID: 26502882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The effect of images on item statistics in multiple choice anatomy examinations.
Notebaert AJ
Anat Sci Educ; 2017 Jan; 10(1):68-78. PubMed ID: 27472765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Climbing Bloom's taxonomy pyramid: Lessons from a graduate histology course.
Zaidi NB; Hwang C; Scott S; Stallard S; Purkiss J; Hortsch M
Anat Sci Educ; 2017 Sep; 10(5):456-464. PubMed ID: 28231408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Are faculty predictions or item taxonomies useful for estimating the outcome of multiple-choice examinations?
Kibble JD; Johnson T
Adv Physiol Educ; 2011 Dec; 35(4):396-401. PubMed ID: 22139777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A novel student-led approach to multiple-choice question generation and online database creation, with targeted clinician input.
Harris BH; Walsh JL; Tayyaba S; Harris DA; Wilson DJ; Smith PE
Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(2):182-8. PubMed ID: 25893940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Using generalizability analysis to estimate parameters for anatomy assessments: A multi-institutional study.
Byram JN; Seifert MF; Brooks WS; Fraser-Cotlin L; Thorp LE; Williams JM; Wilson AB
Anat Sci Educ; 2017 Mar; 10(2):109-119. PubMed ID: 27458988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Clinical vignettes improve performance in anatomy practical assessment.
Ikah DS; Finn GM; Swamy M; White PM; McLachlan JC
Anat Sci Educ; 2015; 8(3):221-9. PubMed ID: 24953193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Item Analysis of Multiple Choice Questions at the Department of Paediatrics, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Bahrain.
Kheyami D; Jaradat A; Al-Shibani T; Ali FA
Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J; 2018 Feb; 18(1):e68-e74. PubMed ID: 29666684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Long-menu questions in computer-based assessments: a retrospective observational study.
Cerutti B; Blondon K; Galetto A
BMC Med Educ; 2016 Feb; 16():55. PubMed ID: 26861755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Determinants of Difficulty and Discriminating Power of Image-based Test Items in Postgraduate Radiological Examinations.
Rutgers DR; van Raamt F; van der Gijp A; Mol C; Ten Cate O
Acad Radiol; 2018 May; 25(5):665-672. PubMed ID: 29198947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Do images influence assessment in anatomy? Exploring the effect of images on item difficulty and item discrimination.
Vorstenbosch MA; Klaassen TP; Kooloos JG; Bolhuis SM; Laan RF
Anat Sci Educ; 2013; 6(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22674609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis.
McCrossan P; Nicholson A; McCallion N
BMC Med Educ; 2022 May; 22(1):400. PubMed ID: 35614439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Small group learning: effect on item analysis and accuracy of self-assessment of medical students.
Biswas SS; Jain V; Agrawal V; Bindra M
Educ Health (Abingdon); 2015; 28(1):16-21. PubMed ID: 26261109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Student perception and post-exam analysis of one best MCQs and one correct MCQs: A comparative study.
Adhi MI; Aly SM
J Pak Med Assoc; 2018 Apr; 68(4):570-575. PubMed ID: 29808047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Pick-N multiple choice-exams: a comparison of scoring algorithms.
Bauer D; Holzer M; Kopp V; Fischer MR
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2011 May; 16(2):211-21. PubMed ID: 21038082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. High time for a change: psychometric analysis of multiple-choice questions in nursing.
Redmond SP; Hartigan-Rogers JA; Cobbett S
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh; 2012 Nov; 9():. PubMed ID: 23192053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Illustrated versus non-illustrated anatomical test items in anatomy course tests and German Medical Licensing examinations (M1).
Bahlmann O
GMS J Med Educ; 2018; 35(2):Doc25. PubMed ID: 29963615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
