Using item response theory to explore the psychometric properties of extended matching questions examination in undergraduate medical education

BMC Medical Education

Volumn 5, Issue , 2005, Pages

  Bhakta, Bipin ^a   Tennant, Alan ^a   Horton, Mike ^a   Lawton, Gemma ^a   Andrich, David ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b MURDOCH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL STUDENT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF EVALUATION; STANDARD; ADULT; ALGORITHM; AUSTRALIA; CALIBRATION; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; EDUCATION; MEDICAL SCHOOL; MEDICINE; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES; SPECIALIZATION; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURGERY; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADULT; ALGORITHMS; CALIBRATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EDUCATION, MEDICAL; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, UNDERGRADUATE; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HUMANS; MEDICINE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOMETRICS; SCHOOLS, MEDICAL; SPECIALIZATION; SPECIALTIES, SURGICAL; WESTERN AUSTRALIA;

EID: 18244403516     PISSN: 14726920     EISSN: 14726920     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-5-9     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Wass V, Van der Vleuten CPM, Shatzer J, Jones R: Assessment in clinical competence. Lancet 2001, 357:945-9.
2. General Medical Council: Education Committee. Tomorrow's doctors: Recommendations on undergraduate medical education. London General Medical Council 2002.
3. Miller GE: The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Academic Medicine 1990, 65(9 Suppl):563-7.
4. Case SM, Swanson DB: Extended matching items: a practical alternative to free response questions. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 1993, 5:107-15.
5. Case SM, Swanson DB: Evaluating diagnostic pattern: A psychometric comparison of items with 15, 5 and 2 options. Paper presented at meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco 1989.
6. Fenderson BA, Damjanov I, Robeson MR, Veloski JJ, Rubin E: The Virtues of Extended Matching and Uncued Tests as Alternatives to Multiple Choice Questions. Human Pathology 1997, 28:526-32.
7. Kreiter CD, Ferguson K, Gruppen LD: Evaluating the usefulness of computerized adaptive testing for medical in-course assessment. Academic Medicine 1999, 74:1125-8.
8. Impara JC, Plake BS: Standard Setting: An Alternative Approach. Journal of Educational Measurement 1997, 34:353-66.
9. Kane M: Validating the Performance Standards Associated with Passing Scores. Review of Educational Research 1994, 64:425-61.
10. Stone GE: Objective standard setting (or truth in advertising). Journal of Applied Measurement 2001, 2:187-201.
11. Hambleton R, Slater S: Item response theory models and testing practices: Current international status and future directions. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 1997, 13:20-28.
12. Hambelton RK: Emergence of item response modelling in instrument development and data analysis. Medical Care 2000, 38(9 Suppl II):60-65.
13. Rasch G: Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960. (Reprinted 1980)
14. Dobby J, Duckworth D: Objective assessment by means of item banking. Schools Council Examination Bulletin 40. Evans/Methuen Educational 1979.
15. Andrich D: Controversy and the Rasch model: A characteristic of incompatable paradigms? Medical Care 2004, 42(1 Suppl):17-16.
16. Andrich D: Rasch Models for Measurement. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 68 Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1998.
17. Rasch G: On specific objectivity: An attempt at formalising the request for generality and validity of scientific statements. In The Danish yearbook of philosophy Edited by: Glegvad M. Copenhagen:Munksgaard; 1977:58-94.
18. Wright BD, Panchapakesan N: A Procedure for Sample Free Item Analysis". Educational and Psychological Measurement 1969, 29:23-48.
19. Umar J: Item Banking. In Educational research methodology and measurement Edited by: Keeves JP. Oxford:Elsevier Science; 1997:923-930.
20. Chopin B: A fully conditional estimation procedures for Rasch model parameters. Report No 196 Los Angeles: University of California, Graduate School of education Center for the study of Evaluation; 1983.
21. Andrich D, Sheridan BS, Luo G: RUMM2020: Rasch Unidimensional Models for Measurement Perth Western Australia, RUMM Laboratory; 2002.
22. Van Alphen A, Halfens R, Hasman A, Imbos T: Likert or Rasch? Nothing is more applicable than a good theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1994, 20:196-201.
23. Banerji M, Smith RM, Dedrick RF: Dimensionality of an early childhood scale using Rasch analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. J Outcome Meas 1997, 1:56-85.
24. Smith RM: Fit analysis in latent trait measurement models. J Appl Meas 2000, 1:199-218.
25. Bland JM, Altman DG: Multiple significance tests - the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995, 310:170-170.
26. Angoff WH: Perspectives on Differential Item Functioning Methodology. In Differential Item Functioning Edited by: Holland PW, Wainer H. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1993.
27. Hagquist C, Andrich D: Is the Sense of Coherence-instrument applicable on adolescents? - a latent trait analysis using Rasch-modeling. Personality and Individual Differences 2004, 36:955-968.
28. Van Batenburg TA, Laros JA: Graphical analysis of test items. Educational Research and Evaluation 2002, 8:319-333.
29. Burton RF: Quanitifying the effects of chance in multiple choice and true/false tests: question selection and guessing of answers. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 2001, 26:41-50.
30. Alagumalai S, Keeves JP: Distractors - Can they be biased too? Journal of Outcome Measurement 1999, 3:89-102.
31. Kehoe J: Basic Item Analysis for Multiple-Choice Tests ERIC/AE, Eric Clearing House on Assessment and Evaluation, Washington, DC; 1995.
32. Wang W: Rasch Analysis of Distractors in Multiple-choice Items. Journal of Outcome Measurement 1998, 2:43-65.
33. Luce RD, Tukey JW: Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1964, 1:1-27.
34. Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health measurement scales Second edition. Oxford University Press:Oxford; 1995.
35. Karabastos G: Axiomatic measurement theory as a basis for model selection in item response theory. 32nd Annual conference, Mathematical Psychology 1999.
36. Popham WJ, Husek TR: Implications of criterion-referenced measurement. Journal of Educational Measurement 1969, 6:1-9.