Suppr超能文献

美国国家医学考试委员会第二部分考试中肿瘤相关项目的内容偏差。

Content bias in the neoplastic-related items of the National Board of Medical Examiners Part II Examination.

作者信息

Ruckdeschel J C, Lea J W, Brown S, Horton J

出版信息

Med Pediatr Oncol. 1982;10(3):269-73. doi: 10.1002/mpo.2950100307.

Abstract

The Education Evaluation Committee of the American Association for Cancer Education (AACE) attempted to employ the neoplastic-related items from the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Part II examination in a study correlating program characteristics at various medical schools with performance on the neoplastic-related items. All questions on the September, 1977 and April, 1978 NBME Part II examinations were reviewed by board certified medical oncologists who found an approximate 20% discordance between the AACE and NBME classifications. Content analysis of the neoplastic-related items disclosed a preponderance of questions related to gynecologic cancer with few questions concerning the major solid tumors: lung, breast and colorectal cancer. In addition, virtually no questions related to the psychologic impact of cancer or to the therapy of cancer were asked. We conclude that the use of item by item performance scores from the neoplastic-related items is inadequate for program analysis due to disagreements over what constitutes such an item and to content bias in the agreed upon items. We propose a coding system that may allow the results from current NBME examinations to be used in program evaluation.

摘要

美国癌症教育协会(AACE)教育评估委员会试图在一项研究中采用美国国家医学考试委员会(NBME)第二部分考试中与肿瘤相关的题目,该研究将各医学院校的课程特点与这些肿瘤相关题目的表现联系起来。1977年9月和1978年4月NBME第二部分考试的所有题目都由获得委员会认证的医学肿瘤学家进行了审查,他们发现AACE和NBME的分类之间存在约20%的不一致。对肿瘤相关题目的内容分析显示,妇科癌症相关的问题占主导地位,而关于主要实体瘤(肺癌、乳腺癌和结直肠癌)的问题很少。此外,几乎没有关于癌症心理影响或癌症治疗的问题。我们得出结论,由于在构成此类题目的定义上存在分歧以及在商定题目中存在内容偏差,使用肿瘤相关题目的逐题表现分数进行课程分析是不够的。我们提出了一种编码系统,该系统可能允许将当前NBME考试的结果用于课程评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验