Logo-rdme
Res Dev Med Educ. 2022;11: 24.
doi: 10.34172/rdme.2022.024
  Abstract View: 435
  PDF Download: 384

Original Research

Assessment of multiple-choice questions by item analysis for medical students’ examinations

Marzieh Nojomi 1, Maryam Mahmoudi 2* ORCID logo

1 Preventive Medicine and Public Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Community and Family Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
*Corresponding Author: Corresponding author: Maryam Mahmoudi, Email: , Email: Mahmoudi.mar@iums.ac.ir

Abstract

Background: Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are a common assessment method, and it is crucial to design them carefully. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the item analysis of MCQ exams in clerkship tests for general medicine students.

Methods: Following a cross-sectional study, a total of 1202 MCQs designed for fourth-year clerkship medical students in the second semester of 2019 were analyzed. Difficulty and discrimination indices of student scores and taxonomy levels were then computed. Furthermore, the prepared standard structural Millman checklist was utilized.

Results: Of the 1202 MCQs, according to difficulty indices, most questions (666) were considered acceptable (55.39%). In terms of the discrimination index (DI), 530 (44.09%) questions had an average discrimination coefficient. Additionally, 215 (17.88%) had a negative or poor DI and required revision or elimination from the tests bank. Of the 1202 MCQs, 669 (50.7 %) were designed at a lower cognitive level (taxonomy I), 174 (14.5 %) belonged to taxonomy II, and 419 (34.8%) of the questions had taxonomy III. Moreover, according to the structural flaws of the Millman checklist, the most common structural flaw was a lack of negative choices for Stems 1127 (93.8 %), while vertical options 376 (31.3%) were the least common.

Conclusion: Based on the results, it is recommended that easy questions and negative/poor DI of items, a high level of Bloom’s taxonomy type I, and questions with unstructured flaws be reviewed and reconstructed to improve the quality of the question banks. Holding training courses on designing test questions could effectively improve the quality of the questions.

First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View: 436

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


PDF Download: 384

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

Submitted: 24 May 2022
Revision: 03 Jul 2022
Accepted: 04 Jul 2022
ePublished: 31 Dec 2022
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)