scholarly journals Development of multiple choice question bank in otorhinolaryngology by item analysis: a cross-sectional study

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 449
Author(s):  
Ajeet Kumar Khilnani ◽  
Rekha Thaddanee ◽  
Gurudas Khilnani
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Low Achievers ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
High Achievers ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Difficulty Index

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are routinely used for formative and summative assessment in medical education. Item analysis is a process of post validation of MCQ tests, whereby items are analyzed for difficulty index, discrimination index and distractor efficiency, to obtain a range of items of varying difficulty and discrimination indices. This study was done to understand the process of item analysis and analyze MCQ test so that a valid and reliable MCQ bank in otorhinolaryngology is developed.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 158 students of 7<sup>th</sup> Semester were given an 8 item MCQ test. Based on the marks achieved, the high achievers (top 33%, 52 students) and low achievers (bottom 33%, 52 students) were included in the study. The responses were tabulated in Microsoft Excel Sheet and analyzed for difficulty index, discrimination index and distractor efficiency.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> The mean (SD) difficulty index (Diff-I) of 8 item test was 61.41% (11.81%). 5 items had a very good difficulty index (41% to 60%), while 3 items were easy (Diff-I &gt;60%). There was no item with Diff-I &lt;30%, i.e. a difficult item, in this test. The mean (SD) discrimination index (DI) of the test was 0.48 (0.15), and all items had very good discrimination indices of more than 0.25. Out of 24 distractors, 6 (25%) were non-functional distractors (NFDs). The mean (SD) distractor efficiency (DE) of the test was 74.62% (23.79%).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Item analysis should be an integral and regular activity in each department so that a valid and reliable MCQ question bank is developed.</p>

scholarly journals Item analysis as tool to validate multiple choice question bank in pharmacology

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 1999
Author(s):  
Amit P. Date ◽  
Archana S. Borkar ◽  
Rupesh T. Badwaik ◽  
Riaz A. Siddiqui ◽  
Tanaji R. Shende ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Incorrect Response ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Lower Ability ◽  
Difficulty Index

Background: Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common method for formative and summative assessment of medical students. Item analysis enables identifying good MCQs based on difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI), distracter efficiency (DE). The objective of this study was to assess the quality of MCQs currently in use in pharmacology by item analysis and develop a MCQ bank with quality items.Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 148 second year MBBS students at NKP Salve institute of medical sciences from January 2018 to August 2018. Forty MCQs twenty each from the two term examination of pharmacology were taken for item analysis A correct response to an item was awarded one mark and each incorrect response was awarded zero. Each item was analyzed using Microsoft excel sheet for three parameters such as DIF I, DI, and DE.Results: In present study mean and standard deviation (SD) for Difficulty index (%) Discrimination index (%) and Distractor efficiency (%) were 64.54±19.63, 0.26±0.16 and 66.54±34.59 respectively. Out of 40 items large number of MCQs has acceptable level of DIF (70%) and good in discriminating higher and lower ability students DI (77.5%). Distractor efficiency related to presence of zero or 1 non-functional distrator (NFD) is 80%.Conclusions: The study showed that item analysis is a valid tool to identify quality items which regularly incorporated can help to develop a very useful, valid and a reliable question bank.

scholarly journals Assessment of MCQs in MBBS program in college of Medicine, King Khalid University Abha (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdulaziz Alamri ◽  
Omer Abdelgadir Elfaki ◽  
Karimeldin A Salih ◽  
Suliman Al Humayed ◽  
Fatmah Mohammed Ahmad Althebat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Analysis Data ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Difficulty Index

BACKGROUND Multiple choice questions represent one of the commonest methods of assessment in medical education. They believed to be reliable and efficient. Their quality depends on good item construction. Item analysis is used to assess their quality by computing difficulty index, discrimination index, distractor efficiency and test reliability. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of MCQs used in the college of medicine, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia. METHODS Design: Cross sectional Study design Setting, Materials and methods Item analysis data of 21 MCQs exams were collected. Values for difficulty index, discrimination index, distractor efficiency and reliability coefficient were entered in MS excel 2010. Descriptive statistic parameters were computed. RESULTS Twenty one tests were analyzed. Overall, 7% of the items among all the tests were difficult, 35% were easy and 58% were acceptable. The mean difficulty of all the tests was in the acceptable range of 0.3-0.85. Items with acceptable discrimination index among all tests were 39%-98%. Negatively discriminating items were identified in all tests except one. All distractors were functioning in 5%-48%. The mean functioning distractors ranged from 0.77 to 2.25. The KR-20 scores lie between 0.47 and 0.97 CONCLUSIONS Overall, the quality of the items and tests was found to be acceptable. Some items were identified to be problematic and need to be revised. The quality of few tests of specific courses was questionable. These tests need to be revised and steps taken to improve this situation.

scholarly journals Item Analysis of Multiple Choice Questions at the Department of Paediatrics, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Bahrain

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deena Kheyami ◽  
Ahmed Jaradat ◽  
Tareq Al-Shibani ◽  
Fuad A. Ali
Keyword(s):  
Item Difficulty ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Arabian Gulf ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Optimal Number ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Difficulty Index

Objectives: The current study aimed to carry out a post-validation item analysis of multiple choice questions (MCQs) in medical examinations in order to evaluate correlations between item difficulty, item discrimination and distraction effectiveness so as to determine whether questions should be included, modified or discarded. In addition, the optimal number of options per MCQ was analysed. Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed in the Department of Paediatrics, Arabian Gulf University, Manama, Bahrain. A total of 800 MCQs and 4,000 distractors were analysed between November 2013 and June 2016. Results: The mean difficulty index ranged from 36.70–73.14%. The mean discrimination index ranged from 0.20–0.34. The mean distractor efficiency ranged from 66.50–90.00%. Of the items, 48.4%, 35.3%, 11.4%, 3.9% and 1.1% had zero, one, two, three and four nonfunctional distractors (NFDs), respectively. Using three or four rather than five options in each MCQ resulted in 95% or 83.6% of items having zero NFDs, respectively. The distractor efficiency was 91.87%, 85.83% and 64.13% for difficult, acceptable and easy items, respectively (P <0.005). Distractor efficiency was 83.33%, 83.24% and 77.56% for items with excellent, acceptable and poor discrimination, respectively (P <0.005). The average Kuder-Richardson formula 20 reliability coefficient was 0.76. Conclusion: A considerable number of the MCQ items were within acceptable ranges. However, some items needed to be discarded or revised. Using three or four rather than five options in MCQs is recommended to reduce the number of NFDs and improve the overall quality of the examination.

scholarly journals Item Analysis: The impact of distractor efficiency on the discrimination power of multiple choice items

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assad Ali Rezigalla ◽  
Elwathiq Khalid Ibrahim ◽  
Amar Babiker ElHussein
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Discrimination Power ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Distractor efficiency of multiple choice item responses is a component of item analysis used by the examiners to to evaluate the credibility and functionality of the distractors.Objective To evaluate the impact of functionality (efficiency) of the distractors on difficulty and discrimination indices.Methods A cross-sectional study in which standard item analysis of an 80-item test consisted of A type MCQs was performed. Correlation and significance of variance among Difficulty index (DIF), discrimination index (DI), and distractor Efficiency (DE) were measured.Results There is a significant moderate positive correlation between difficulty index and distractor efficiency, which means there is a tendency for high difficulty index go with high distractor efficiency (and vice versa). A weak positive correlation between distractor efficiency and discrimination index.Conclusions Non-functional distractor can reduce discrimination power of multiple choice questions. More training and effort for construction of plausible options of MCQ items is essential for the validity and reliability of the tests.

scholarly journals Analysis of Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency of Multiple Choice Questions of Speech Sounds of English

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-28
Author(s):  
Lok Raj Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Low Achievers ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
High Achievers ◽  
First Year ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Research Article ◽  
Bachelor Of Education ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
English Students

The prime purpose of this research article is to analyze 20 multiple choice questions (MCQs) regarding the consonant and vowel sounds of English having asked to the Bachelor of Education (B. Ed) first year major English students in their achievement examination conducted at Makawanpur Multiple Campus, Hetauda, Nepal in 2020. The researcher employed 33% students from the group of high achievers from the top and 33% students from the group of low achievers from the bottom by including 18 students from the population of 27 students. Each item was analyzed for difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI), and distractor effectiveness (DE). 3 (15%) questions fell in the range of the difficulty index of (0.20 – 0.39). 14 (70%) questions fell in the range of the difficulty index of (0.40 – 0.59).  2 (10%) questions fell in the range of the difficulty index of (0.60 – 0.79).  1 (5%) Question fell in the range of the difficulty index of (0.80 – 0.89).  2 (10%) questions lay in the discrimination index of (0.20-0.29) and 18 (90%) questions lay in the discrimination index of    5 (25%) questions had one non-functional distractor, whereas 15 (75%) questions had zero nun-functional distractor. Out of 60 distractors, 5 (8.34%) distractors were non-functional and 55 (91.66%) distractors were functional. It was found that most of the multiple choice questions were reliable and valid.

scholarly journals DIFFICULTY AND DISCRIMINATION ANALYSIS OF END OF TERM MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS AT COMMUNITY MEDICINE DEPARTMENT, WAH MEDICAL COLLEGE

2021 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 1308-10
Author(s):  
Musarat Ramzan ◽  
Khola Waheed Khan ◽  
Saana Bibi ◽  
Shezadi Sabah Imran
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Community Medicine ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medicine Department ◽  
Test Items ◽  
Medical College ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Difficulty Index

Objective: To perform post analysis of multiple-choice questions given in the 2nd term and send up examinations of the years 2016 to 2018, to establish relationship between difficulty (DF) and discrimination indices (DI) and to find out significant mean difference between the two. Study Design: Cross sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: Community Medicine Department, Wah Medical College, Wah, from Nov 2018 to Mar 2019. Methodology: A total of 390 Multiple-Choice Question of second term and send-up were taken for the study from the year 2016, 2017 and 2018. The response sheets were assessed by Optical Machine Reader (OMR) and the level of difficulty, power of discrimination and reliability were obtained. The data was entered in SPSS version 22. Results: A total of 315 test items were included. Results of the study showed that the reliability (KR20) for all the examined items was in the acceptable range i.e. ≥0.7 and there was no association was found between difficulty index and year p=0.310. The mean difficulty index was found to be 0.48 ± 0.22 and discrimination index as 0.24 ± 0.14. Conclusion: The analysis of 390 test items showed that most of the questions were acceptable in terms of difficulty and discrimination. There is still a need to modify and improve the testing ability of the MCQs with negative discrimination and higher difficulty index.

scholarly journals Quality of multiple choice questions in undergraduate pharmacology assessments in a teaching hospital of Kerala, India: an item analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 1265
Author(s):  
Manju K. Nair ◽  
Dawnji S. R.
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
Response Type ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Microsoft Excel ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
Upper Third

Background: Carefully constructed, high quality multiple choice questions can serve as effective tools to improve standard of teaching. This item analysis was performed to find the difficulty index, discrimination index and number of non functional distractors in single best response type questions.Methods: 40 single best response type questions with four options, each carrying one mark for the correct response, was taken for item analysis. There was no negative marking. The maximum marks was 40. Based on the scores, the evaluated answer scripts were arranged with the highest score on top and the least score at the bottom. Only the upper third and lower third were included. The response to each item was entered in Microsoft excel 2010. Difficulty index, Discrimination index and number of non functional distractors per item were calculated.Results: 40 multiple choice questions and 120 distractors were analysed in this study. 72.5% items were good with a difficulty index between 30%-70%. 25% items were difficult and 2.5% items were easy. 27.5% items showed excellent discrimination between high scoring and low scoring students. One item had a negative discrimination index (-0.1). There were 9 items with non functional distractors.Conclusions: This study emphasises the need for improving the quality of multiple choice questions. Hence repeated evaluation by item analysis and modification of non functional distractors may be performed to enhance standard of teaching in Pharmacology.

scholarly journals Impact Measurement on Medical Faculty for Adhering to Appropriate Guidelines in Framing Effective Multiple-Choice Questions for Item Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Surajit Kundu ◽  
Jaideo M Ughade ◽  
Anil R Sherke ◽  
Yogita Kanwar ◽  
Samta Tiwari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Medical Faculty ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
Cognitive Domain ◽  
Difficulty Level ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Impact Measurement ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
The Impact

Background: Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are the most frequently accepted tool for the evaluation of comprehension, knowledge, and application among medical students. In single best response MCQs (items), a high order of cognition of students can be assessed. It is essential to develop valid and reliable MCQs, as flawed items will interfere with the unbiased assessment. The present paper gives an attempt to discuss the art of framing well-structured items taking kind help from the provided references. This article puts forth a practice for committed medical educators to uplift the skill of forming quality MCQs by enhanced Faculty Development programs (FDPs). Objectives: The objective of the study is also to test the quality of MCQs by item analysis. Methods: In this study, 100 MCQs of set I or set II were distributed to 200 MBBS students of Late Shri Lakhiram Agrawal Memorial Govt. Medical College Raigarh (CG) for item analysis for quality MCQs. Set I and Set II were MCQs which were formed by 60 medical faculty before and after FDP, respectively. All MCQs had a single stem with three wrong and one correct answers. The data were entered in Microsoft excel 2016 software to analyze. The difficulty index (Dif I), discrimination index (DI), and distractor efficiency (DE) were the item analysis parameters used to evaluate the impact on adhering to the guidelines for framing MCQs. Results: The mean calculated difficulty index, discrimination index, and distractor efficiency were 56.54%, 0.26, and 89.93%, respectively. Among 100 items, 14 items were of higher difficulty level (DIF I < 30%), 70 were of moderate category, and 16 items were of easy level (DIF I > 60%). A total of 10 items had very good DI (0.40), 32 had recommended values (0.30 - 0.39), and 25 were acceptable with changes (0.20 - 0.29). Of the 100 MCQs, there were 27 MCQs with DE of 66.66% and 11 MCQs with DE of 33.33%. Conclusions: In this study, higher cognitive-domain MCQs increased after training, recurrent-type MCQ decreased, and MCQ with item writing flaws reduced, therefore making our results much more statistically significant. We had nine MCQs that satisfied all the criteria of item analysis.

scholarly journals Post-application Quality Analysis of MCQs of Preclinical Examination Using Item Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-7
Author(s):  
Md Ahsan Habib ◽  
Humayun Kabir Talukder ◽  
Md Mahbubur Rahman ◽  
Shahnila Ferdousi
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Quality Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Class Interval ◽  
Discriminatory Ability ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Difficulty Index ◽  
Medical Examinations

Multiple choice questions (MCQs) have considerable role in the preclinical medical assessment, both formative as well as summative. This cross sectional descriptive study was conducted to observe the quality of MC items (completion type) of anatomy, biochemistry and physiology used in preclinical undergraduate medical examinations of 2012 and 2013 of a public university of Bangladesh. Each MC item had a stem and 5 options, and 1200 options were analyzed for difficulty and discrimination indices. Total 556 options were false statements (distracters) and were analyzed to observe their effectiveness as distracter. The study revealed that 18.67% of options were with appropriate difficulty (0.660.80). Highest frequency (43.5%) of difficulty indices was in easy class interval (0.911). Over all frequencies of items of three subjects in the ascending order were difficult, appropriate, marginal and easy as per their difficulty indices. Satisfactory or better discrimination indices (=0.20) were observed in 29.33% options. The mean difficulty and discrimination indices observed were respectively 0.82±0.18 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81 to 0.83) and 0.13±0.14 (95% CI 0.122 to 0.138). Out of the options, 6.75% had negative discrimination indices. Items with difficulty index around 0.60 had maximum discriminatory power (up to 0.68) and more difficult as well as easy items had less discriminatory ability. Out of the distracters 83.45% were observed effective and the mean effectiveness was 22.3±18.7% (95% CI 20.75% to 23.85%). The study recommended using the method and findings to improve the quality of the items leading to development of a standard Question Bank.Bangladesh Journal of Medical Education Vol.7(1) 2016: 2-7

scholarly journals Study on item and test analysis of multiple choice questions amongst undergraduate medical students

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 1562
Author(s):  
Abhijeet S. Ingale ◽  
Purushottam A. Giri ◽  
Mohan K. Doibale
Keyword(s):  
Item Analysis ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Test Methods ◽  
Discrimination Index ◽  
Multiple Choice Questions ◽  
Undergraduate Medical Students ◽  
Test Quality ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Difficulty Index

Background: Item analysis is the process of collecting, summarizing and using information from students’ response to assess the quality of test items. However it is said that MCQs emphasize recall of factual information rather than conceptual understanding and interpretation of concepts. There is more to writing good MCQs than writing good questions. The objectives of the study was to assess the item and test quality of multiple choice questions and to deal with the learning difficulties of students, identify the low achievers in the test. Methods: The hundred MBBS students from Government medical college were examined. A test comprising of thirty MCQs was administered. All items were analysed for Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency. Data entered in MS Excel 2007 and SPSS 21 analysed with statistical test of significance. Results: Majority 80% items difficulty index is within acceptable range. 63% items showed excellent discrimination Index. Distractor efficiency was overall satisfactory. Conclusions: Multiple choice questions with average difficulty and also having high discriminating power with good distracter efficiency should be incorporated into student’s examination. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document