Cargando…

Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology

BACKGROUND: Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common method of assessment of medical students. The quality of MCQs is determined by three parameters such as difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI), and distracter efficiency (DE). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kaur, Mandeep, Singla, Shweta, Mahajan, Rajiv
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27563581
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.186965
_version_ 1782447300125130752
author Kaur, Mandeep
Singla, Shweta
Mahajan, Rajiv
author_facet Kaur, Mandeep
Singla, Shweta
Mahajan, Rajiv
author_sort Kaur, Mandeep
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common method of assessment of medical students. The quality of MCQs is determined by three parameters such as difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI), and distracter efficiency (DE). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess the quality of MCQs currently in use in pharmacology and discard the MCQs which are not found useful. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A class test of central nervous system unit was conducted in the Department of Pharmacology. This test comprised 50 MCQs/items and 150 distracters. A correct response to an item was awarded one mark with no negative marking for incorrect response. Each item was analyzed for three parameters such as DIF I, DI, and DE. RESULTS: DIF of 38 (76%) items was in the acceptable range (P = 30–70%), 11 (22%) items were too easy (P > 70%), and 1 (2%) item was too difficult (P < 30%). DI of 31 (62%) items was excellent (d > 0.35), of 12 (24%) items was good (d = 0.20–0.34), and of 7 (14%) items was poor (d < 0.20). A total of 50 items had 150 distracters. Among these, 27 (18%) were nonfunctional distracters (NFDs) and 123 (82%) were functional distracters. Items with one NFD were 11 and with two NFDs were 8. Based on these parameters, 6 items were discarded, 17 were revised, and 27 were kept for subsequent use. CONCLUSION: Item analysis is a valuable tool as it helps us to retain the valuable MCQs and discard the items which are not useful. It also helps in increasing our skills in test construction and identifies the specific areas of course content which need greater emphasis or clarity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4979297
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49792972016-08-25 Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology Kaur, Mandeep Singla, Shweta Mahajan, Rajiv Int J Appl Basic Med Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common method of assessment of medical students. The quality of MCQs is determined by three parameters such as difficulty index (DIF I), discrimination index (DI), and distracter efficiency (DE). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess the quality of MCQs currently in use in pharmacology and discard the MCQs which are not found useful. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A class test of central nervous system unit was conducted in the Department of Pharmacology. This test comprised 50 MCQs/items and 150 distracters. A correct response to an item was awarded one mark with no negative marking for incorrect response. Each item was analyzed for three parameters such as DIF I, DI, and DE. RESULTS: DIF of 38 (76%) items was in the acceptable range (P = 30–70%), 11 (22%) items were too easy (P > 70%), and 1 (2%) item was too difficult (P < 30%). DI of 31 (62%) items was excellent (d > 0.35), of 12 (24%) items was good (d = 0.20–0.34), and of 7 (14%) items was poor (d < 0.20). A total of 50 items had 150 distracters. Among these, 27 (18%) were nonfunctional distracters (NFDs) and 123 (82%) were functional distracters. Items with one NFD were 11 and with two NFDs were 8. Based on these parameters, 6 items were discarded, 17 were revised, and 27 were kept for subsequent use. CONCLUSION: Item analysis is a valuable tool as it helps us to retain the valuable MCQs and discard the items which are not useful. It also helps in increasing our skills in test construction and identifies the specific areas of course content which need greater emphasis or clarity. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4979297/ /pubmed/27563581 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.186965 Text en Copyright: © 2016 International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kaur, Mandeep
Singla, Shweta
Mahajan, Rajiv
Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title_full Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title_fullStr Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title_full_unstemmed Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title_short Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
title_sort item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27563581
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.186965
work_keys_str_mv AT kaurmandeep itemanalysisofinusemultiplechoicequestionsinpharmacology
AT singlashweta itemanalysisofinusemultiplechoicequestionsinpharmacology
AT mahajanrajiv itemanalysisofinusemultiplechoicequestionsinpharmacology