• 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

变革精神科皇家医学院理论考试:数字化与极短答题(VSAQs)

Transforming MRCPsych theory examinations: digitisation and very short answer questions (VSAQs).

作者信息

Scheeres Karl, Agrawal Niruj, Ewen Stephanie, Hall Ian

机构信息

Centre for Health Sciences Education, University of Bristol, UK.

St George's Hospital, UK.

出版信息

BJPsych Bull. 2022 Feb;46(1):52-56. doi: 10.1192/bjb.2021.23.

DOI:10.1192/bjb.2021.23
PMID:33752773
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8914921/
Abstract

Many examinations are now delivered online using digital formats, the migration to which has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The MRCPsych theory examinations have been delivered in this way since Autumn 2020. The multiple choice question formats currently in use are highly reliable, but other formats enabled by the digital platform, such as very short answer questions (VSAQs), may promote deeper learning. Trainees often ask for a focus on core knowledge, and the absence of cueing with VSAQs could help achieve this. This paper describes the background and evidence base for VSAQs, and how they might be introduced. Any new question formats would be thoroughly piloted before appearing in the examinations and are likely to have a phased introduction alongside existing formats.

摘要

现在许多考试都采用数字形式在线进行,新冠疫情加速了向这种方式的转变。自2020年秋季以来,精神科皇家医学院理论考试就一直以这种方式进行。目前使用的多项选择题形式非常可靠,但数字平台支持的其他形式,如非常简短的回答问题(VSAQs),可能会促进更深入的学习。学员们经常要求关注核心知识,而VSAQs没有提示可能有助于实现这一点。本文描述了VSAQs的背景和证据基础,以及如何引入它们。任何新的问题形式在用于考试之前都会进行全面试点,并且可能会与现有形式分阶段引入。

相似文献

1
Transforming MRCPsych theory examinations: digitisation and very short answer questions (VSAQs).变革精神科皇家医学院理论考试:数字化与极短答题(VSAQs)
BJPsych Bull. 2022 Feb;46(1):52-56. doi: 10.1192/bjb.2021.23.
2
Twelve tips for introducing very short answer questions (VSAQs) into your medical curriculum.将极短回答问题(VSAQs)引入医学课程的十二条建议。
Med Teach. 2023 Apr;45(4):360-367. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2093706. Epub 2022 Jul 14.
3
Very Short Answer Questions: A Novel Approach To Summative Assessments In Pathology.极简短回答问题:病理学总结性评估的一种新方法。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2019 Nov 4;10:943-948. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S197977. eCollection 2019.
4
Use of very short answer questions compared to multiple choice questions in undergraduate medical students: An external validation study.采用简答题而非选择题对医学生进行测试:一项外部验证研究。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 14;18(7):e0288558. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288558. eCollection 2023.
5
Exploring the feasibility of using very short answer questions (VSAQs) in team-based learning (TBL).探讨在团队学习(TBL)中使用非常简短回答问题(VSAQs)的可行性。
Clin Teach. 2021 Aug;18(4):404-408. doi: 10.1111/tct.13347. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
6
Very-short-answer questions: reliability, discrimination and acceptability.简答题:信度、区分度和可接受性。
Med Educ. 2018 Apr;52(4):447-455. doi: 10.1111/medu.13504. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
7
Thinking differently - Students' cognitive processes when answering two different formats of written question.从不同角度思考——学生回答两种不同书面问题形式时的认知过程。
Med Teach. 2021 Nov;43(11):1278-1285. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1935831. Epub 2021 Jun 14.
8
[Learning from assessment: how quality questions can stimulate learning].从评估中学习:高质量问题如何激发学习
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2024 Feb 1;168:D8012.
9
The impact of cueing on written examinations of clinical decision making: a case study.提示对临床决策书面考试的影响:一项案例研究。
Med Educ. 2014 Mar;48(3):255-61. doi: 10.1111/medu.12296.
10
Standard setting Very Short Answer Questions (VSAQs) relative to Single Best Answer Questions (SBAQs): does having access to the answers make a difference?标准制定 简答题(VSAs)与单项最佳选择题(SBAs)相对:是否能获得答案会有影响吗?
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Aug 23;22(1):640. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03693-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Online-Based and Technology-Assisted Psychiatric Education for Trainees: Scoping Review.面向学员的基于网络和技术辅助的精神科教育:范围综述
JMIR Med Educ. 2025 Apr 15;11:e64773. doi: 10.2196/64773.
2
Use of very short answer questions compared to multiple choice questions in undergraduate medical students: An external validation study.采用简答题而非选择题对医学生进行测试:一项外部验证研究。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 14;18(7):e0288558. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288558. eCollection 2023.
3
Functional near-infrared spectroscopy of medical students answering various item types.对回答各类题型的医学生进行功能性近红外光谱分析。
Front Psychol. 2023 Jun 12;14:1178753. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1178753. eCollection 2023.
4
The virtual Clinical Assessment of Skills and Competence: the impact and challenges of a digitised final examination.技能与能力的虚拟临床评估:数字化期末考试的影响与挑战
BJPsych Bull. 2023 Apr;47(2):110-115. doi: 10.1192/bjb.2021.112.

本文引用的文献

1
A systematic review of online examinations: A pedagogical innovation for scalable authentication and integrity.在线考试的系统评价:一种用于可扩展认证和诚信的教学创新。
Comput Educ. 2020 Dec;159:104024. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104024. Epub 2020 Sep 22.
2
Restarting training and examinations in the era of COVID-19: a perspective from the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians UK.重启 COVID-19 时代的培训和考试:来自英国皇家医师学院联合会的观点。
Clin Med (Lond). 2020 Nov;20(6):e248-e252. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2020-0481. Epub 2020 Sep 10.
3
Very Short Answer Questions: A Novel Approach To Summative Assessments In Pathology.极简短回答问题:病理学总结性评估的一种新方法。
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2019 Nov 4;10:943-948. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S197977. eCollection 2019.
4
Comparing single-best-answer and very-short-answer questions for the assessment of applied medical knowledge in 20 UK medical schools: Cross-sectional study.比较 20 所英国医学院应用医学知识评估中的单项最佳答案题和极简短答案题:横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 26;9(9):e032550. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032550.
5
Using prescribing very short answer questions to identify sources of medication errors: a prospective study in two UK medical schools.使用处方简短回答问题来识别药物错误的来源:在两所英国医学院进行的前瞻性研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 9;9(7):e028863. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028863.
6
Very-short-answer questions: reliability, discrimination and acceptability.简答题:信度、区分度和可接受性。
Med Educ. 2018 Apr;52(4):447-455. doi: 10.1111/medu.13504. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
7
Exploring examinee behaviours as validity evidence for multiple-choice question examinations.探索考生行为作为多项选择题考试的效度证据。
Med Educ. 2017 Oct;51(10):1075-1085. doi: 10.1111/medu.13367. Epub 2017 Jul 31.
8
Validity of very short answer versus single best answer questions for undergraduate assessment.本科评估中极简短回答题与单项最佳答案题的效度。
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Oct 13;16(1):266. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0793-z.
9
Raising the standard: it's time to review the MRCPsych examinations.提高标准:是时候对精神科皇家医学院院士资格考试进行审视了。
BJPsych Bull. 2015 Oct;39(5):262. doi: 10.1192/pb.39.5.262.
10
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.