296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27530011)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Correlation of MCQ and SEQ scores in written undergraduate ophthalmology assessment.
Mahmood H
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2015 Mar; 25(3):185-8. PubMed ID: 25772958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Comparison of long-menu and single-best-answer multiple choice questions in computer-based summative assessments: a randomised controlled trial.
Cerutti B; Stollar F; Escher M; Blondon K; Aujesky S; Nendaz M; Galetto-Lacour A
BMC Med Educ; 2019 Jun; 19(1):219. PubMed ID: 31215430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A psychometric analysis of a newly developed summative, multiple choice question assessment adapted from Canada to a Middle Eastern context.
Pawluk SA; Shah K; Minhas R; Rainkie D; Wilby KJ
Curr Pharm Teach Learn; 2018 Aug; 10(8):1026-1032. PubMed ID: 30314537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance.
Walsh JL; Harris BHL; Denny P; Smith P
Postgrad Med J; 2018 Feb; 94(1108):97-103. PubMed ID: 28866607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Peer review improves psychometric characteristics of multiple choice questions.
Abozaid H; Park YS; Tekian A
Med Teach; 2017 Apr; 39(sup1):S50-S54. PubMed ID: 28103718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Should essays and other "open-ended"-type questions retain a place in written summative assessment in clinical medicine?
Hift RJ
BMC Med Educ; 2014 Nov; 14():249. PubMed ID: 25431359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Local development of MCQ tests for evidence-based medicine and clinical decision making can be successful.
Crites GE; Markert RJ; Goggans DS; Richardson WS
Teach Learn Med; 2012; 24(4):341-7. PubMed ID: 23036002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Analysis of MCQ and distractor use in a large first year Health Faculty Foundation Program: assessing the effects of changing from five to four options.
Fozzard N; Pearson A; du Toit E; Naug H; Wen W; Peak IR
BMC Med Educ; 2018 Nov; 18(1):252. PubMed ID: 30404624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
