Metheny W P, Holzman G B
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta.
J Med Educ. 1988 Jun;63(6):456-62. doi: 10.1097/00001888-198806000-00005.
Clerkship directors in obstetrics-gynecology often use the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) norms to evaluate third-year medical students' performance on the NBME obstetrics-gynecology subject examination. A comparison of the scores of 342 students at the Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine showed that the students performed significantly better on the NBME subject examination than on the Part II subtest in obstetrics-gynecology. These results concur with the findings of the NBME, which advises directors wishing to adjust the criterion group norms to determine the average difference observed in a school's performance on the two examinations and to use that difference or some portion of it in their interpretation of percentile scores on the subject examination. Additional analyses revealed that a single, linear weight may inappropriately adjust these scores, that student performance on the Part II subtest depends on specialty choice (obstetrics-gynecology versus all others), and that time and sequence of the clerkship were unrelated to the students' performance on the two examinations.
妇产科实习主任通常会使用美国国家医学考试委员会(NBME)的标准来评估三年级医学生在NBME妇产科科目考试中的表现。对佐治亚医学院342名学生的成绩进行比较后发现,这些学生在NBME科目考试中的表现明显优于妇产科第二部分子测试。这些结果与NBME的研究结果一致,NBME建议主任们希望调整标准组规范,以确定在学校的两次考试表现中观察到的平均差异,并在解释科目考试的百分位数分数时使用该差异或其中的一部分。进一步分析表明,单一的线性权重可能会不适当地调整这些分数,学生在第二部分子测试中的表现取决于专业选择(妇产科与其他所有专业),并且实习的时间和顺序与学生在两次考试中的表现无关。