Suppr超能文献

问题设计对www.elearnSCI.org上自我评估回复的影响:一项子模块试点研究

The influence of question design on the response to self-assessment in www.elearnSCI.org: a submodule pilot study.

作者信息

Liu N, Li X-W, Zhou M-W, Biering-Sørensen F

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.

Department for Spinal Cord Injuries, Glostrup Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

Spinal Cord. 2015 Aug;53(8):604-7. doi: 10.1038/sc.2014.226. Epub 2015 Feb 17.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

This is an interventional training session.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the difference in response to self-assessment questions in the original and an adjusted version for a submodule of www.elearnSCI.org for student nurses.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a teaching hospital affiliated to Peking University, China.

METHODS

In all, 28 student nurses divided into two groups (groups A and B; 14 in each) received a print-out of a Chinese translation of the slides from the 'Maintaining skin integrity following spinal cord injury' submodule in www.elearnSCI.org for self-study. Both groups were then tested using the 10 self-assessment multiple-choice questions (MCQs) related to the same submodule. Group A used the original questions, whereas group B received an adjusted questionnaire.

RESULTS

The responses to four conventional single-answer MCQs were nearly all correct in both groups. However, in three questions, group A, with the option 'All of the above', had a higher number of correct answers than group B, with multiple-answer MCQs. In addition, in another three questions, group A, using the original multiple-answer MCQs, had fewer correct answers than group B, where it was only necessary to tick a single incorrect answer.

CONCLUSION

Variations in design influence the response to questions. The use of conventional single-answer MCQs should be reconsidered, as they only examine the recall of isolated knowledge facts. The 'All of the above' option should be avoided because it would increase the number of correct answers arrived at by guessing. When using multiple-answer MCQs, it is recommended that the questions asked should be in accordance with the content within the www.elearnSCI.org.

摘要

研究设计

这是一次干预性培训课程。

目的

本研究旨在调查针对学生护士的www.elearnSCI.org一个子模块的原始版本和调整版本中自我评估问题的回答差异。

背景

该研究在中国北京大学附属教学医院进行。

方法

总共28名学生护士被分为两组(A组和B组,每组14人),他们收到了www.elearnSCI.org中“脊髓损伤后保持皮肤完整性”子模块幻灯片的中文翻译打印件用于自学。然后两组都使用与同一子模块相关的10道自我评估多项选择题(MCQs)进行测试。A组使用原始问题,而B组收到的是一份调整后的问卷。

结果

两组中对四道传统的单项选择题的回答几乎全部正确。然而,在三道问题中,有“以上全部”选项的A组正确答案数量比有多选项的B组多。此外,在另外三道问题中,使用原始多选项MCQs的A组正确答案数量比B组少,在B组只需勾选一个错误答案。

结论

设计上的差异会影响对问题的回答。应重新考虑使用传统的单项选择题,因为它们仅考查孤立知识事实的记忆。应避免使用“以上全部”选项,因为它会增加猜测得出的正确答案数量。当使用多选项MCQs时,建议所提问题应与www.elearnSCI.org中的内容一致。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验