Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: Item analysis of multiple-choice questions (MCQs) is an essential tool for identifying items that can be stored, revised, or discarded to build a quality MCQ bank. This study analyzed MCQs based on item analysis to develop a pool of valid and reliable items and investigate stakeholders' perceptions regarding MCQs in a written summative assessment (WSA) based on this item analysis.
Methods: In this descriptive study, 55 questions each from 2016 to 2019 of WSA in preclinical removable prosthodontics for fourth-year undergraduate dentistry students were analyzed for item analysis. Items were categorized according to their difficulty index (DIF I) and discrimination index (DI). Students (2021-2022) were assessed using this question bank. Students' perceptions of and feedback from faculty members concerning this assessment were collected using a questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale.
Results: Of 220 items when both indices (DIF I and DI) were combined, 144 (65.5%) were retained in the question bank, 66 (30%) required revision before incorporation into the question bank, and only 10 (4.5%) were discarded. The mean DIF I and DI values were 69% (standard deviation [Std.Dev] = 19) and 0.22 (Std.Dev = 0.16), respectively, for 220 MCQs. The mean scores from the questionnaire for students and feedback from faculty members ranged from 3.50 to 4.04 and from 4 to 5, respectively, indicating that stakeholders tended to agree and strongly agree, respectively, with the proposed statements.
Conclusion: This study assisted the prosthodontics department in creating a set of prevalidated questions with known difficulty and discrimination capacity.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13462 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!