scholarly journals Predicting the Difficulty of Multiple Choice Questions in a High-stakes Medical Exam

Author(s):  
Le An Ha ◽  
Victoria Yaneva ◽  
Peter Baldwin ◽  
Janet Mee

Best of Five MCQs for the Acute Medicine SCE is a new revision resource designed specifically for this high-stakes exam. Containing over 350 Best of Five multiple choice questions, this dedicated guide will help candidates to prepare successfully. The content mirrors the SCE in Acute Medicine Blueprint to ensure candidates are fully prepared for all the topics that may appear in the exam. Topics range from how to manage acute problems in cardiology or neurology to managing acute conditions such as poisoning. All answers have full explanations and further reading to ensure high quality self-assessment and quick recognition of areas that require further study.


2006 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 662-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Tarrant ◽  
Aimee Knierim ◽  
Sasha K. Hayes ◽  
James Ware

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 709-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Sanjay Heist ◽  
Jed David Gonzalo ◽  
Steven Durning ◽  
Dario Torre ◽  
David Michael Elnicki

Abstract Background Clinical vignette multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are widely used in medical education, but clinical reasoning (CR) strategies employed when approaching these questions have not been well described. Objectives The aims of the study were (1) to identify CR strategies and test-taking (TT) behaviors of physician trainees while solving clinical vignette MCQs; and (2) to examine the relationships between CR strategies and behaviors, and performance on a high-stakes clinical vignette MCQ examination. Methods Thirteen postgraduate year–1 level trainees completed 6 clinical vignette MCQs using a think-aloud protocol. Thematic analysis employing elements of grounded theory was performed on data transcriptions to identify CR strategies and TT behaviors. Participants' CR strategies and TT behaviors were then compared with their US Medical Licensing Examination Step 2 Clinical Knowledge scores. Results Twelve CR strategies and TT behaviors were identified. Individuals with low performance on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge demonstrated increased premature closure and increased faulty knowledge, and showed comparatively less ruling out of alternatives or admission of knowledge deficits. High performers on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge demonstrated increased ruling out of alternatives and admission of knowledge deficits, and less premature closure, faulty knowledge, or closure prior to reading the alternatives. Conclusions Different patterns of CR strategies and TT behaviors may be used by high and low performers during high-stakes clinical vignette MCQ examinations.


Author(s):  
Talip Karanfil ◽  
Steve Neufeld

High-stakes and high-volume English language proficiency tests typically rely on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) to assess reading and listening skills. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, more institutions are using MCQs via online assessment platforms, which facilitate shuffling the order of options within test items to minimize cheating. There is scant research on the role that order and sequence of options plays in MCQs, so this study examined the results of a paper-based, high-stakes English proficiency test administered in two versions. Each version had identical three-option MCQs but with different ordering of options. The test-takers were chosen to ensure a very similar profile of language ability and level for the groups who took the two versions. The findings indicate that one in four questions exhibited significantly different levels of difficulty and discrimination between the two versions. The study identifies order dominance and sequence priming as two factors that influence the outcomes of MCQs, both of which can accentuate or diminish the power of attraction of the correct and incorrect options. These factors should be carefully considered when designing MCQs in high-stakes language proficiency tests and shuffling of options in either paper-based or computer-based testing.


2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (9) ◽  
pp. 890-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin R Fischer ◽  
Sibyl Herrmann ◽  
Veronika Kopp

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 354-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Tarrant ◽  
Aimee Knierim ◽  
Sasha K. Hayes ◽  
James Ware

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document