Department of Medical Education, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Family Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2022;19:33. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2022.19.33. Epub 2022 Dec 12.
This study aims to apply the yes/no Angoff and Hofstee methods to actual Korean Medical Licensing Examination (KMLE) 2022 written examination data to estimate cut scores for the written KMLE.
Fourteen panelists gathered to derive the cut score of the 86th KMLE written examination data using the yes/no Angoff method. The panel reviewed the items individually before the meeting and shared their respective understanding of the minimum-competency physician. The standard setting process was conducted in 5 rounds over a total of 800 minutes. In addition, 2 rounds of the Hofstee method were conducted before starting the standard setting process and after the second round of yes/no Angoff.
For yes/no Angoff, as each round progressed, the panel’s opinion gradually converged to a cut score of 198 points, and the final passing rate was 95.1%. The Hofstee cut score was 208 points out of a maximum 320 with a passing rate of 92.1% at the first round. It scored 204 points with a passing rate of 93.3% in the second round.
The difference between the cut scores obtained through yes/no Angoff and Hofstee methods did not exceed 2% points, and they were within the range of cut scores from previous studies. In both methods, the difference between the panelists decreased as rounds were repeated. Overall, our findings suggest the acceptability of cut scores and the possibility of independent use of both methods.
本研究旨在将 yes/no Angoff 和 Hofstee 方法应用于实际的韩国医师执照考试(KMLE)2022 笔试数据,以估算笔试的及格分数。
14 名专家组成员聚集在一起,使用 yes/no Angoff 方法从第 86 次 KMLE 笔试数据中得出及格分数。在会议之前,专家组单独审查了这些项目,并分享了他们对最低能力医师的各自理解。标准制定过程共进行了 5 轮,总计 800 分钟。此外,在开始标准制定过程之前和 yes/no Angoff 第二轮之后,还进行了两轮 Hofstee 方法。
对于 yes/no Angoff,随着每一轮的进行,专家组的意见逐渐收敛到 198 分的及格分数,最终的通过率为 95.1%。第一轮 Hofstee 的及格分数为 320 分中的 208 分,通过率为 92.1%;第二轮的及格分数为 204 分,通过率为 93.3%。
yes/no Angoff 和 Hofstee 方法得出的及格分数差异不超过 2%,且均在以往研究的及格分数范围内。在这两种方法中,随着轮数的重复,专家组之间的差异逐渐减小。总体而言,我们的研究结果表明,这两种方法的及格分数是可接受的,且有可能独立使用。