• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

兽医毒理学课程中三选项与四选项多项选择题的题目表现比较

Comparing Item Performance on Three- Versus Four-Option Multiple Choice Questions in a Veterinary Toxicology Course.

作者信息

Royal Kenneth, Dorman David

机构信息

Department of Clinical Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.

Department of Molecular and Biomedical Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA.

出版信息

Vet Sci. 2018 Jun 9;5(2):55. doi: 10.3390/vetsci5020055.

DOI:10.3390/vetsci5020055
PMID:29890727
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6024797/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The number of answer options is an important element of multiple-choice questions (MCQs). Many MCQs contain four or more options despite the limited literature suggesting that there is little to no benefit beyond three options. The purpose of this study was to evaluate item performance on 3-option versus 4-option MCQs used in a core curriculum course in veterinary toxicology at a large veterinary medical school in the United States.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental, crossover design was used in which students in each class were randomly assigned to take one of two versions (A or B) of two major exams.

RESULTS

Both the 3-option and 4-option MCQs resulted in similar psychometric properties.

CONCLUSION

The findings of our study support earlier research in other medical disciplines and settings that likewise concluded there was no significant change in the psychometric properties of three option MCQs when compared to the traditional MCQs with four or more options.

摘要

背景

选择题的选项数量是多项选择题(MCQs)的一个重要元素。许多多项选择题包含四个或更多选项,尽管有限的文献表明,超过三个选项几乎没有益处。本研究的目的是评估在美国一所大型兽医学院的兽医毒理学核心课程中使用的三选项与四选项多项选择题的题目表现。

方法

采用准实验性交叉设计,每个班级的学生被随机分配参加两场主要考试的两个版本(A或B)中的一个。

结果

三选项和四选项多项选择题产生了相似的心理测量特性。

结论

我们的研究结果支持了其他医学学科和环境中的早期研究,这些研究同样得出结论,与传统的四个或更多选项的多项选择题相比,三选项多项选择题的心理测量特性没有显著变化。

相似文献

1
Comparing Item Performance on Three- Versus Four-Option Multiple Choice Questions in a Veterinary Toxicology Course.兽医毒理学课程中三选项与四选项多项选择题的题目表现比较
Vet Sci. 2018 Jun 9;5(2):55. doi: 10.3390/vetsci5020055.
2
Reducing the number of options on multiple-choice questions: response time, psychometrics and standard setting.减少多项选择题的选项数量:反应时间、心理测量学和标准设定。
Med Educ. 2014 Oct;48(10):1020-7. doi: 10.1111/medu.12525.
3
Multiple choice questions: a literature review on the optimal number of options.多项选择题:关于最佳选项数量的文献综述
Natl Med J India. 2008 May-Jun;21(3):130-3.
4
Comparison in the quality of distractors in three and four options type of multiple choice questions.三选项和四选项选择题中干扰项质量的比较。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017 Apr 10;8:287-291. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S128318. eCollection 2017.
5
A, B, or C? A Quasi-experimental Multi-site Study Investigating Three Option Multiple Choice Questions.A、B还是C?一项调查三选项多项选择题的准实验性多地点研究。
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2019 Dec 17;16(1):ijnes-2019-0061. doi: 10.1515/ijnes-2019-0061.
6
Comparison between three option, four option and five option multiple choice question tests for quality parameters: A randomized study.针对质量参数的三选项、四选项和五选项多项选择题测试之间的比较:一项随机研究。
Indian J Pharmacol. 2016 Sep-Oct;48(5):571-575. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.190757.
7
Assessment of Global Health Education: The Role of Multiple-Choice Questions.全球健康教育评估:多项选择题的作用。
Front Public Health. 2021 Jul 22;9:640204. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.640204. eCollection 2021.
8
Medical students create multiple-choice questions for learning in pathology education: a pilot study.医学生在病理学教育中创建多选题进行学习:一项试点研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Aug 22;18(1):201. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1312-1.
9
Evaluation of MCQs from MOOCs for common item writing flaws.评估大规模开放在线课程中的多项选择题是否存在常见的题目编写缺陷。
BMC Res Notes. 2018 Dec 3;11(1):849. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3959-4.
10
Evaluation of Cognitive levels and Item writing flaws in Medical Pharmacology Internal Assessment Examinations.医学药理学内部评估考试中认知水平及试题编写缺陷的评估
Pak J Med Sci. 2017 Jul-Aug;33(4):866-870. doi: 10.12669/pjms.334.12887.

引用本文的文献

1
Experiences from Two Ways of Integrating Pre- and Post-course Multiple-choice Assessment Questions in Educational Events for Surgeons.外科医生教育活动中课程前后多项选择题评估问题两种整合方式的经验
J Eur CME. 2021 May 13;10(1):1918317. doi: 10.1080/21614083.2021.1918317.

本文引用的文献

1
Robust (and Ethical) Educational Research Designs.稳健(且符合伦理)的教育研究设计
J Vet Med Educ. 2018 Spring;45(1):11-15. doi: 10.3138/jvme.1015-162r1. Epub 2017 Jun 5.
2
The Impact of 3-Option Responses to Multiple-Choice Questions on Guessing Strategies and Cut Score Determinations.对多项选择题采用三选项回答对猜测策略和及格分数确定的影响。
J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2017 Apr;5(2):84-89.
3
Comparison between three option, four option and five option multiple choice question tests for quality parameters: A randomized study.针对质量参数的三选项、四选项和五选项多项选择题测试之间的比较:一项随机研究。
Indian J Pharmacol. 2016 Sep-Oct;48(5):571-575. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.190757.
4
Psychometrics of Multiple Choice Questions with Non-Functioning Distracters: Implications to Medical Education.具有无效干扰项的多项选择题的心理测量学:对医学教育的启示。
Indian J Physiol Pharmacol. 2015 Oct-Dec;59(4):428-35.
5
The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications.专业能力评估:发展、研究与实际影响。
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1996 Jan;1(1):41-67. doi: 10.1007/BF00596229.
6
High time for a change: psychometric analysis of multiple-choice questions in nursing.是时候做出改变了:护理专业选择题的心理测量分析
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2012 Nov 26;9:/j/ijnes.2012.9.issue-1/1548-923X.2487/1548-923X.2487.xml. doi: 10.1515/1548-923X.2487.
7
A framework for improving the quality of multiple-choice assessments.提高选择题质量的框架。
Nurse Educ. 2012 May-Jun;37(3):98-104. doi: 10.1097/NNE.0b013e31825041d0.
8
A comparison of the psychometric properties of three- and four-option multiple-choice questions in nursing assessments.三种和四种选项多项选择题在护理评估中的心理测量特性比较。
Nurse Educ Today. 2010 Aug;30(6):539-43. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2009.11.002. Epub 2010 Jan 6.
9
An assessment of functioning and non-functioning distractors in multiple-choice questions: a descriptive analysis.评估多选题中的干扰项的功能和非功能:描述性分析。
BMC Med Educ. 2009 Jul 7;9:40. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-9-40.
10
Multiple choice questions: a literature review on the optimal number of options.多项选择题:关于最佳选项数量的文献综述
Natl Med J India. 2008 May-Jun;21(3):130-3.