307 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9661734)
1. 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]
2. Polytomous modeling of cognitive errors in computer adaptive testing.
Wang L; Li CS
J Appl Meas; 2001; 2(4):356-78. PubMed ID: 12011504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Adaptive testing for psychological assessment: how many items are enough to run an adaptive testing algorithm?
Wagner-Menghin MM; Masters GN
J Appl Meas; 2013; 14(2):106-17. PubMed ID: 23816590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An examination of exposure control and content balancing restrictions on item selection in CATs using the partial credit model.
Davis LL; Pastor DA; Dodd BG; Chiang C; Fitzpatrick SJ
J Appl Meas; 2003; 4(1):24-42. PubMed ID: 12700429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The transition of the national certification examination from paper and pencil to computer adaptive testing.
Zaglaniczny KL
AANA J; 1996 Feb; 64(1):9-14. PubMed ID: 8928607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Utilizing Rasch measurement models to develop a computer adaptive self-report of walking, climbing, and running.
Velozo CA; Wang Y; Lehman L; Wang JH
Disabil Rehabil; 2008; 30(6):458-67. PubMed ID: 18297500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Measurement precision and efficiency of multidimensional computer adaptive testing of physical functioning using the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory.
Haley SM; Ni P; Ludlow LH; Fragala-Pinkham MA
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2006 Sep; 87(9):1223-9. PubMed ID: 16935059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Applying computerized adaptive testing to the CES-D scale: a simulation study.
Smits N; Cuijpers P; van Straten A
Psychiatry Res; 2011 Jun; 188(1):147-55. PubMed ID: 21208660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Computerized adaptive testing: a mixture item selection approach for constrained situations.
Leung CK; Chang HH; Hau KT
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2005 Nov; 58(Pt 2):239-57. PubMed ID: 16293199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Rasch fit statistics as a test of the invariance of item parameter estimates.
Smith RM; Suh KK
J Appl Meas; 2003; 4(2):153-63. PubMed ID: 12748407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Impact of Item Parameter Drift in Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT).
Risk N
J Appl Meas; 2016; 17(1):54-78. PubMed ID: 26784378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Features of the sampling distribution of the ability estimate in computerized adaptive testing according to two stopping rules.
Blais JG; Raiche G
J Appl Meas; 2010; 11(4):424-31. PubMed ID: 21164229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Psychometric aspects of item mapping for criterion-referenced interpretation and bookmark standard setting.
Huynh H
J Appl Meas; 2010; 11(1):91-8. PubMed ID: 20351450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Binary items and beyond: a simulation of computer adaptive testing using the Rasch partial credit model.
Lange R
J Appl Meas; 2008; 9(1):81-104. PubMed ID: 18180552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Using the dichotomous Rasch model to analyze polytomous items.
He Q; Wheadon C
J Appl Meas; 2013; 14(1):44-56. PubMed ID: 23442327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Optimizing measurement of vision-related quality of life: a computerized adaptive test for the impact of vision impairment questionnaire (IVI-CAT).
Fenwick EK; Loe BS; Khadka J; Man REK; Rees G; Lamoureux EL
Qual Life Res; 2020 Mar; 29(3):765-774. PubMed ID: 31707693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Combining CAT with cognitive diagnosis: a weighted item selection approach.
Wang C; Chang HH; Douglas J
Behav Res Methods; 2012 Mar; 44(1):95-109. PubMed ID: 21853408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparability of decisions for computer adaptive and written examinations.
Lunz ME; Bergstrom BA
J Allied Health; 1991; 20(1):15-23. PubMed ID: 2045351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparing single-pool and multiple-pool designs regarding test security in computerized testing.
Zhang J; Chang HH; Yi Q
Behav Res Methods; 2012 Sep; 44(3):742-52. PubMed ID: 22218817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
