• 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

发现进展测试数据中的未知反应模式,以提高学生表现的估计。

Discovering unknown response patterns in progress test data to improve the estimation of student performance.

机构信息

Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, AG Progress Test Medizin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Med Educ. 2023 Mar 29;23(1):193. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04172-w.

DOI:10.1186/s12909-023-04172-w
PMID:36978145
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10053036/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Progress Test Medizin (PTM) is a 200-question formative test that is administered to approximately 11,000 students at medical universities (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) each term. Students receive feedback on their knowledge (development) mostly in comparison to their own cohort. In this study, we use the data of the PTM to find groups with similar response patterns.

METHODS

We performed k-means clustering with a dataset of 5,444 students, selected cluster number k = 5, and answers as features. Subsequently, the data was passed to XGBoost with the cluster assignment as target enabling the identification of cluster-relevant questions for each cluster with SHAP. Clusters were examined by total scores, response patterns, and confidence level. Relevant questions were evaluated for difficulty index, discriminatory index, and competence levels.

RESULTS

Three of the five clusters can be seen as "performance" clusters: cluster 0 (n = 761) consisted predominantly of students close to graduation. Relevant questions tend to be difficult, but students answered confidently and correctly. Students in cluster 1 (n = 1,357) were advanced, cluster 3 (n = 1,453) consisted mainly of beginners. Relevant questions for these clusters were rather easy. The number of guessed answers increased. There were two "drop-out" clusters: students in cluster 2 (n = 384) dropped out of the test about halfway through after initially performing well; cluster 4 (n = 1,489) included students from the first semesters as well as "non-serious" students both with mostly incorrect guesses or no answers.

CONCLUSION

Clusters placed performance in the context of participating universities. Relevant questions served as good cluster separators and further supported our "performance" cluster groupings.

摘要

背景

Progress Test Medizin (PTM) 是一项 200 题的形成性测试,每学期约有 11000 名医科大学生(德国、奥地利、瑞士)参加。学生主要通过与自己的同学进行比较来获得知识(发展)的反馈。在这项研究中,我们使用 PTM 的数据来找到具有相似反应模式的群体。

方法

我们使用了一个包含 5444 名学生的数据进行 k-均值聚类,选择聚类数量 k=5,并将答案作为特征。随后,我们将数据传递给 XGBoost,以簇分配作为目标,使用 SHAP 识别每个簇的相关问题。我们通过总分、反应模式和置信水平来检查簇。对相关问题进行了难度指数、区分指数和能力水平的评估。

结果

五个簇中有三个可以看作是“表现”簇:第 0 簇(n=761)主要由接近毕业的学生组成。相关问题往往比较难,但学生回答得自信且正确。第 1 簇(n=1357)的学生较为先进,第 3 簇(n=1453)主要由初学者组成。这些簇的相关问题相对简单,猜测的答案数量增加。有两个“辍学”簇:第 2 簇(n=384)的学生在最初表现良好后中途退出测试;第 4 簇(n=1489)包括来自第一学期的学生和“不认真”的学生,他们的答案大多是错误的或没有答案。

结论

簇将表现置于参与大学的背景下。相关问题是很好的簇分隔符,并进一步支持了我们的“表现”簇分组。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/ff9fea50c6fe/12909_2023_4172_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/1cf92b68c95d/12909_2023_4172_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/0a43261e02c6/12909_2023_4172_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/15eb5c66ee4d/12909_2023_4172_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/d41463f1387a/12909_2023_4172_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/9bdae59ffa4e/12909_2023_4172_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/ff9fea50c6fe/12909_2023_4172_Fig6_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/1cf92b68c95d/12909_2023_4172_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/0a43261e02c6/12909_2023_4172_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/15eb5c66ee4d/12909_2023_4172_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/d41463f1387a/12909_2023_4172_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/9bdae59ffa4e/12909_2023_4172_Fig5_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c638/10053036/ff9fea50c6fe/12909_2023_4172_Fig6_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Discovering unknown response patterns in progress test data to improve the estimation of student performance.发现进展测试数据中的未知反应模式,以提高学生表现的估计。
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Mar 29;23(1):193. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04172-w.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Group-tailored feedback on online mental health screening for university students: using cluster analysis.针对大学生在线心理健康筛查的群体定制反馈:使用聚类分析。
BMC Prim Care. 2022 Jan 25;23(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01622-6.
4
Self-monitoring accuracy does not increase throughout undergraduate medical education.自我监测的准确性并不会在整个本科医学教育中提高。
Med Educ. 2020 Apr;54(4):320-327. doi: 10.1111/medu.14057. Epub 2020 Mar 2.
5
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.
6
Tensions in post-examination feedback: information for learning versus potential for harm.考试后反馈中的紧张关系:用于学习的信息与伤害风险
Med Educ. 2017 Sep;51(9):963-973. doi: 10.1111/medu.13366.
7
Team Objective Structured Bedside Assessment (TOSBA) as formative assessment in undergraduate Obstetrics and Gynaecology: a cohort study.团队目标结构化床边评估(TOSBA)作为本科妇产科的形成性评估:一项队列研究
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Oct 9;15:172. doi: 10.1186/s12909-015-0456-5.
8
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.
9
Nursing students collaborating to develop multiple-choice exam revision questions: A student engagement study.护理专业学生合作编写多项选择题考试复习题:一项学生参与度研究。
Nurse Educ Today. 2017 Dec;59:6-11. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.08.009. Epub 2017 Sep 6.
10
Sheep's coping style can be identified by unsupervised machine learning from unlabeled data.通过对无标签数据进行无监督机器学习,可以识别出绵羊的应对方式。
Behav Processes. 2022 Jan;194:104559. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2021.104559. Epub 2021 Nov 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Generating learning guides for medical education with LLMs and statistical analysis of test results.利用大语言模型生成医学教育学习指南并对测试结果进行统计分析。
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Mar 29;25(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-06978-2.
2
A systematic review of progress test as longitudinal assessment in Saudi Arabia.沙特阿拉伯将进展测试作为纵向评估的系统评价。
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Jan 21;25(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-06671-4.

本文引用的文献

1
Using Markov chain model to evaluate medical students' trajectory on progress tests and predict USMLE step 1 scores---a retrospective cohort study in one medical school.使用马尔可夫链模型评估医学生在阶段性测试中的进展轨迹并预测美国医师执照考试第一步的成绩——一所医学院校的回顾性队列研究
BMC Med Educ. 2021 Apr 9;21(1):200. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02633-8.
2
From Local Explanations to Global Understanding with Explainable AI for Trees.利用可解释人工智能实现从局部解释到树木的全局理解
Nat Mach Intell. 2020 Jan;2(1):56-67. doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9. Epub 2020 Jan 17.
3
Self-monitoring accuracy does not increase throughout undergraduate medical education.
自我监测的准确性并不会在整个本科医学教育中提高。
Med Educ. 2020 Apr;54(4):320-327. doi: 10.1111/medu.14057. Epub 2020 Mar 2.
4
Institutional strategies related to test-taking behavior in low stakes assessment.低风险评估中与应试行为相关的制度策略。
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2020 May;25(2):321-335. doi: 10.1007/s10459-019-09928-y. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
5
Clustering algorithms: A comparative approach.聚类算法:一种比较方法。
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 15;14(1):e0210236. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210236. eCollection 2019.
6
Development of cognitive processing and judgments of knowledge in medical students: Analysis of progress test results.医学生认知加工与知识判断的发展:进步测试结果分析
Med Teach. 2016 Nov;38(11):1125-1129. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2016.1170781. Epub 2016 Apr 27.
7
Computer versus paper--does it make any difference in test performance?计算机与纸质测试——这对测试表现有影响吗?
Teach Learn Med. 2015;27(1):57-62. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2014.979175.
8
The use of progress testing.使用进展测试。
Perspect Med Educ. 2012 Mar;1(1):24-30. doi: 10.1007/s40037-012-0007-2. Epub 2012 Mar 10.
9
A systemic framework for the progress test: strengths, constraints and issues: AMEE Guide No. 71.一个针对进展测试的系统框架:优势、限制和问题:AMEE 指南第 71 号。
Med Teach. 2012;34(9):683-97. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.704437.
10
Using the Progress Test Medizin (PTM) for evaluation of the Medical Curriculum Munich (MeCuM).使用医学进展测试(PTM)评估慕尼黑医学课程(MeCuM)。
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2010;27(5):Doc70. doi: 10.3205/zma000707. Epub 2010 Nov 15.