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

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.

Download Full-text

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

International Journal of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery ◽

10.18203/issn.2454-5929.ijohns20190779 ◽

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

Background: 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.Methods: 158 students of 7th 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. Results: 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 >60%). There was no item with Diff-I <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%).Conclusions: Item analysis should be an integral and regular activity in each department so that a valid and reliable MCQ question bank is developed.

Download Full-text

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

Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal [SQUMJ] ◽

10.18295/squmj.2018.18.01.011 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

pp. 68 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

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.

Download Full-text

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

International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology ◽

10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20194106 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Online Assessment with Traditional Assessment of Ophthalmology Students: Experience from Public Sector Medical College in Pakistan

Pakistan Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.36351/pjo.v37i4.1330 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 37 (4) ◽

Author(s):

Muhammad Hammad Ayub ◽

Muhammad Hassaan Ali ◽

Uzma Hamza ◽

Kashif Jahangir

Keyword(s):

Cross Sectional Study ◽

P Value ◽

Online Assessment ◽

Multiple Choice Questions ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Traditional Assessment ◽

Test Items ◽

Medical College ◽

Department Of Ophthalmology ◽

Online Examination

Purpose: To perform online assessment of undergraduate ophthalmology students and compare the online examination results with conventional in-person examination during COVID-19 pandemic. Study Design: Comparative, cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, Allama Iqbal Medical College, Lahore, Pakistan. From October 2019 to December 2020. Methods: We used online Google Assessment Forms to administer the online ophthalmology send-up examination to 4th-year MBBS students. The exam consisted of 50 test items with varying difficulty levels and pictures were incorporated into them. The examination results were compared with the conventional face-to-face send-up ophthalmology examination conducted a year ago, which consisted of 50 multiple-choice questions (MCQs). Results: There were 50 questions in the online examination with categorization into C1:C2:C3 levels of cognition. A total of 336 students submitted their responses for online assessment with a mean score of 36.28 out of 50 marks (73.0%) (Range: 7 – 45 marks). C1, C2, and C3 questions were correctly answered by 95.3%, 45.1%, and 11.0% of the students, respectively. The conventional examination was taken by 326 students and consisted of 50 MCQs with C1:C2:C3 questions. The online exam yielded more mean scores than the in-person exam (73.0% versus 56.0%, p-value: 0.001). The rate of failure with scores less than 50% marks was significantly higher in students appearing in conventional exam versus online exam (16.6% versus 1.5% respectively, p-value: 0.0412). Conclusion: Online assessment of undergraduate ophthalmology students is a possible alternative to the conventional examinations during this pandemic. Key Words: Ophthalmology, COVID-19 Pandemic. Medical education.

Download Full-text

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

10.21203/rs.2.15899/v1 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Item Analysis of Multiple Choice Questions in Pharmacology

Journal of Saidu Medical College, Swat ◽

10.52206/jsmc.2020.10.2.320 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Imtiaz Uddin ◽

Iftikhar Uddin ◽

Izaz Ur Rehman ◽

Muhammad Siyar ◽

Usman Mehboob

Keyword(s):

Medical Education ◽

Item Analysis ◽

Multiple Choice ◽

Multiple Choice Questions ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Teaching Programme ◽

Medical College ◽

Item Writing ◽

Difficulty Index

Background: MCQs type assessment in medical education is replacing old theory style. There are concerns regarding the quality of the Multiple Choice Questions.Objectives: To determine the quality of Multiple Choice Questions by item analysis. Material and Methods: Study was a cross sectional descriptive .Fifty Multiple Choice Questions in the final internal evaluation exams in 2015 of Pharmacology at Bacha khan Medical College were analyzed. The quality of each Multiple Choice Questions item was assessed by the Difficulty index (Dif.I), Discriminative Index (D.I) and Distracter Efficiency (D.E).Results: Multiple Choice Questions that were of moderate difficulty were 66%. Easy were 4% and high difficulty were 30%.Reasons for high difficult Multiple Choice Questions were analyzed as Item Writing Flaws 41%, Irreverent Difficulty 36% and C2 level 23%. Discrimination Index shows that majority of MCQs were of Excellent Level (DI greater than 0.25) i.e 52 , Good 32% . (DI=2.15-0.25), Poor 16%. MCQs Distracter Effectiveness (DE)= 4, 3,2,1 were 52%, 34%, 14%, and 0% respectively. Conclusion: Item analysis gives us different parameters with reasons to recheck MCQ pool and teaching programme. High proportions of difficult and sizable amount of poor discriminative indices MCQs were the finding in this study and need to be resolved

Download Full-text

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

10.2196/preprints.9508 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Item Analysis of Multiple-Choice Questions at the Department of Community Medicine, Wah Medical College, Pakistan

Life and Science ◽

10.37185/lns.1.1.53 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 4

Author(s):

Musarat Ramzan ◽

Shezadi Sabah Imran ◽

Sana Bibi ◽

Khola Waheed Khan ◽

Imrana Maqsood

Keyword(s):

Pearson Correlation ◽

Item Analysis ◽

Multiple Choice ◽

Community Medicine ◽

P Value ◽

Multiple Choice Questions ◽

Medical College ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Difficulty Index

Objective: The objective of the study was to assess the quality of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) of three different assessments in the subject of Community Medicine by computing the difficulty index, discrimination index and reliability and to estimate the relationship between difficulty and discrimination indices. Study Design: Retrospective observational study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Community Medicine at Wah Medical College from August to December 2018. Materials and Methods: Three sets of MCQs were included in the study. Mean and standard deviation of difficulty and discrimination indices were calculated and one-way analysis of variance and Kruskal Wallis test were applied on difficulty and discrimination indices. The association was determined by Pearson correlation and considered significant at p value of < 0.05. Results: The mean difficulty index of first term, second term and send-up examination were 41.5, 48.8 and 51.9 respectively. Mean discrimination indices were 0.28, 0.27 and 0.26 and reliability were 0.83, 0.81 and 0.79. In the study, 72% MCQs of the first term, 61.5 % of the second term and 63% of the send-up examinations were in the range 30-70% of difficulty. There was a significant difference in the difficulty indices of the three question papers. The correlation between discrimination and difficulty indices was curvilinear and positively correlated. Conclusion: It is concluded that all three question papers have acceptable reliability, more than 65% MCQs have acceptable difficulty index and about 69% have good discriminatory power.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Heffner Criteria and Light Criteria in Differentiating Exudative and Transudative Pleural Effusion

Nepal Medical College Journal ◽

10.3126/nmcj.v22i3.32638 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (3) ◽

pp. 141-145

Author(s):

Krishna Chandra Devkota ◽

S Hamal ◽

PP Panta

Keyword(s):

Pleural Effusion ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Pleural Space ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical College ◽

The Common ◽

The Mean ◽

Exudative Pleural Effusion

Pleural effusion is present when there is >15ml of fluid is accumulated in the pleural space. It can be divided into two types; exudative and transudative pleural effusion. Tuberculosis and parapneumonic effusion are the common cause of exudative pleural effusion whereas heart failure accounts for most of the cases of transudative pleural effusion. This study was a hospital based cross sectional study performed at Nepal Medical College during the period of January 2016-December 2016. A total of 50 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled. Pleural effusion was confirmed by clinical examination and radiology. After confirmation of pleural effusion, pleural fluid was aspirated and was analysed for protein, LDH, cholesterol. The Heffner criteria was compared with Light criteria to classify exudative or transudative pleural effusion. Among 50 patients, 30 were male and 20 were female. The mean age of patient was 45.4±21.85 years. The sensitivity and specificity of using Light criteria to detect the two type of pleural effusion was 100% and 90.9%, whereas using Heffner criteria was 94.87%, 100% respectively(P<0.01). There are variety of causes for development of pleural effusion and no one criteria is definite to differentiate between exudative or transudative effusion. In this study Light criteria was more sensitive whereas Heffner criteria was more specific to classify exudative pleural effusion. Hence a combination of criteria might be useful in case where there is difficulty to identify the cause of pleural effusion.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of Colorectal Carcinoma With Respect to Age and Gender

10.53350/pjmhs2115123198 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (12) ◽

pp. 3198-3199

Author(s):

Pervez Muhammad ◽

Sajjad Muhammad ◽

Muhammad Tariq ◽

Amir Khan ◽

Akhtar Munir ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Carcinoma ◽

Colorectal Adenocarcinoma ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Medical Institute ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Age And Gender ◽

Medical College ◽

Gender Study ◽

The Mean ◽

And Gender

Aim: Prevalence of colorectal carcinoma with respect to age and gender Study design: Observational / cross sectional study. Place and duration of study: This study was conducted at the Department of Pathology and Surgery, Post Graduate Medical Institute Lahore and Jinnah Medical College Peshawar from July, 2013 to February, 2015 Methodology: Surgical specimens of 60 histopathologically diagnosed cases of colorectal adenocarcinoma were included in this study. Age and sex were evaluated in CRC. Results: The mean±sd of age was 54.4±19.7 yrs. Out of 60 cases, 6 (10%) were between 16-29 yrs, 9 (15%) cases were between 30-49 yrs, 34 cases (56.7%) were of 50-69 yrs and 11 cases (18.33%) were of 70 yrs. Out of sixty cases, males were 33 (55%) and females were 27(45%). Conclusion: There are 34 out of 60(56.7%) patients were 50-69 years and 33 out of 60 (55%) cases were males i.e. males dominance. Keywords: Colorectal adenocarcinoma, immunohistochemistry, gender

Download Full-text