• 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

多选题的开发是否能提高医学生的学习效果?系统评价。

Does developing multiple-choice Questions Improve Medical Students' Learning? A Systematic Review.

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy of Rabat, Mohammed V University, Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.

Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy of Oujda, Mohammed Premier University, Oujda, Morocco.

出版信息

Med Educ Online. 2022 Dec;27(1):2005505. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2021.2005505.

DOI:10.1080/10872981.2021.2005505
PMID:34969352
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8725700/
Abstract

Practicing Multiple-choice questions is a popular learning method among medical students. While MCQs are commonly used in exams, creating them might provide another opportunity for students to boost their learning. Yet, the effectiveness of student-generated multiple-choice questions in medical education has been questioned. This study aims to verify the effects of student-generated MCQs on medical learning either in terms of students' perceptions or their performance and behavior, as well as define the circumstances that would make this activity more useful to the students. Articles were identified by searching four databases MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and ERIC, as well as scanning references. The titles and abstracts were selected based on a pre-established eligibility criterion, and the methodological quality of articles included was assessed using the MERSQI scoring system. Eight hundred and eighty-four papers were identified. Eleven papers were retained after abstract and title screening, and 6 articles were recovered from cross-referencing, making it 17 articles in the end. The mean MERSQI score was 10.42. Most studies showed a positive impact of developing MCQs on medical students' learning in terms of both perception and performance. Few articles in the literature examined the influence of student-generated MCQs on medical students learning. Amid some concerns about time and needed effort, writing multiple-choice questions as a learning method appears to be a useful process for improving medical students' learning.

摘要

医学生中,多选题练习是一种流行的学习方法。虽然多选题常用于考试,但编写多选题也为学生提供了另一个促进学习的机会。然而,学生编写的多选题在医学教育中的有效性一直存在争议。本研究旨在验证学生编写的多选题对医学学习的影响,无论是在学生的认知方面,还是在他们的表现和行为方面,以及确定哪些情况下这种活动对学生更有用。通过在 MEDLINE、SCOPUS、Web of Science 和 ERIC 这四个数据库中进行搜索,并对参考文献进行扫描,确定了相关文章。根据预先设定的入选标准,对标题和摘要进行了筛选,使用 MERSQI 评分系统评估了所纳入文章的方法学质量。共确定了 884 篇论文。经过摘要和标题筛选后,有 11 篇论文被保留,通过交叉引用又找到了 6 篇,最终纳入 17 篇文章。MERSQI 的平均得分为 10.42。大多数研究表明,学生编写多选题对医学生的学习既有认知方面的影响,也有表现方面的影响。文献中的少数几篇文章探讨了学生编写的多选题对医学生学习的影响。尽管存在一些关于时间和所需努力的担忧,但作为一种学习方法,编写多选题似乎是提高医学生学习效果的一个有用过程。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6f4/8725700/63773b5cabb1/ZMEO_A_2005505_F0001_OC.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6f4/8725700/63773b5cabb1/ZMEO_A_2005505_F0001_OC.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6f4/8725700/63773b5cabb1/ZMEO_A_2005505_F0001_OC.jpg

相似文献

1
Does developing multiple-choice Questions Improve Medical Students' Learning? A Systematic Review.多选题的开发是否能提高医学生的学习效果?系统评价。
Med Educ Online. 2022 Dec;27(1):2005505. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2021.2005505.
2
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.
3
Association Between Learning Environment Interventions and Medical Student Well-being: A Systematic Review.学习环境干预与医学生幸福感之间的关联:一项系统综述。
JAMA. 2016 Dec 6;316(21):2237-2252. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.17573.
4
A novel student-led approach to multiple-choice question generation and online database creation, with targeted clinician input.一种由学生主导的新颖方法,用于生成多项选择题并创建在线数据库,同时有针对性地征求临床医生的意见。
Teach Learn Med. 2015;27(2):182-8. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2015.1011651.
5
Development of a competency-based formative progress test with student-generated MCQs: Results from a multi-centre pilot study.基于能力的学生生成式多项选择题形成性进展测试的开发:多中心试点研究结果
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2015 Oct 15;32(4):Doc46. doi: 10.3205/zma000988. eCollection 2015.
6
Training Medical Students to Create and Collaboratively Review Multiple-Choice Questions: A Comprehensive Workshop.培训医学生创建和协作审查多项选择题:综合研讨会。
MedEdPORTAL. 2020 Oct 6;16:10986. doi: 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10986.
7
A comparative study of students' performance in preclinical physiology assessed by multiple choice and short essay questions.一项关于通过多项选择题和短文问题评估学生临床前生理学表现的比较研究。
Afr J Med Med Sci. 2000 Sep-Dec;29(3-4):201-5.
8
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.
9
Using Self-Regulated Learning Microanalysis to Examine Regulatory Processes in Clerkship Students Engaged in Practice Questions.使用自我调节学习微分析考察实习医学生在实践问题中的调节过程。
Perspect Med Educ. 2023 Oct 13;12(1):385-398. doi: 10.5334/pme.833. eCollection 2023.
10
Creating assessments as an active learning strategy: what are students' perceptions? A mixed methods study.创建评估作为一种主动学习策略:学生的看法是什么?一项混合方法研究。
Med Educ Online. 2019 Dec;24(1):1630239. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1630239.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluating the multiple-choice questions quality at the College of Medicine, University of Bisha, Saudi Arabia: a three-year experience.评估沙特阿拉伯比沙大学医学院多项选择题的质量:三年经验
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Feb 13;25(1):233. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-06700-2.
2
Assessing the Effectiveness of Student-generated Scenario-based Questions as a Tool for Active Learning.评估学生生成的基于情景的问题作为主动学习工具的有效性。
Int J Appl Basic Med Res. 2024 Oct-Dec;14(4):278-283. doi: 10.4103/ijabmr.ijabmr_320_24. Epub 2024 Nov 1.
3
Item Analysis of Multiple-Choice Question (MCQ)-Based Exam Efficiency Among Postgraduate Pediatric Medical Students: An Observational, Cross-Sectional Study From Saudi Arabia.

本文引用的文献

1
Student-Written Multiple-Choice Questions-a Practical and Educational Approach.学生编写的多项选择题——一种实用且具教育意义的方法。
Med Sci Educ. 2018 Nov 6;29(1):41-43. doi: 10.1007/s40670-018-00646-5. eCollection 2019 Mar.
2
Active learning through discussion: ICAP framework for education in health professions.主动学习与讨论:卫生职业教育的 ICAP 框架。
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Dec 30;19(1):477. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1901-7.
3
Creating assessments as an active learning strategy: what are students' perceptions? A mixed methods study.
沙特阿拉伯研究生儿科医学生基于多项选择题考试效率的项目分析:一项观察性横断面研究
Cureus. 2024 Sep 11;16(9):e69151. doi: 10.7759/cureus.69151. eCollection 2024 Sep.
4
Assessing an integrated team-teaching lecture in medicine and surgery program- Galala University.评估加拉拉大学校医学和外科学项目中的综合团队教学讲座。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Jul 12;24(1):754. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05685-8.
5
Gender differences in learning and study strategies impact medical students' preclinical and USMLE step 1 examination performance.学习和研究策略方面的性别差异会影响医学生的基础医学课程和美国医师执照考试(USMLE)第 1 步的考试表现。
BMC Med Educ. 2024 May 7;24(1):504. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05494-z.
6
The equation for medical multiple-choice question testing time estimation.医学多项选择题测试时间估算方程。
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024 Apr 4;86(5):2688-2695. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002010. eCollection 2024 May.
7
ChatGPT 3.5 fails to write appropriate multiple choice practice exam questions.ChatGPT 3.5无法编写合适的多项选择题练习考试题目。
Acad Pathol. 2023 Dec 19;11(1):100099. doi: 10.1016/j.acpath.2023.100099. eCollection 2024 Jan-Mar.
8
Interactive Learning: Online Audience Response System and Multiple Choice Questions Improve Student Participation in Lectures.互动式学习:在线观众反应系统和多项选择题可提高学生在讲座中的参与度。
Cureus. 2023 Jul 27;15(7):e42527. doi: 10.7759/cureus.42527. eCollection 2023 Jul.
9
Feedback, fairness, and validity: effects of disclosing and reusing multiple-choice questions in medical schools.反馈、公平性和有效性:在医学院校中披露和重用多项选择题的影响。
Med Educ Online. 2023 Dec;28(1):2143298. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2022.2143298.
创建评估作为一种主动学习策略:学生的看法是什么?一项混合方法研究。
Med Educ Online. 2019 Dec;24(1):1630239. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2019.1630239.
4
Medical education today: all that glitters is not gold.当今的医学教育:并非所有闪闪发光的都是金子。
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Apr 16;19(1):110. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1535-9.
5
Randomized study showing the benefit of medical study writing multiple choice questions on their learning.随机研究表明,在学习中编写医学研究简答题对他们的学习有好处。
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Jan 31;19(1):42. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1469-2.
6
Medical students: what educational resources are they using?医学生:他们在使用哪些教育资源?
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Jan 25;19(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1462-9.
7
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.
8
The effect of question generation activity on students' learning and perception.问题生成活动对学生学习和认知的影响。
J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2018 Apr;6(2):70-77.
9
How to Write a High Quality Multiple Choice Question (MCQ): A Guide for Clinicians.如何编写高质量的多项选择题(MCQ):临床医生指南。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Nov;54(5):654-658. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.07.012. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
10
Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance.形成性学生自主命题题库:认知、问题质量与总结性表现的关联。
Postgrad Med J. 2018 Feb;94(1108):97-103. doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2017-135018. Epub 2017 Sep 2.