Cargando…

Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis

BACKGROUND: To ascertain if undergraduate medical students attain adequate knowledge to practice in paediatrics, we designed the minimum accepted competency (MAC) examination. This was a set of MCQ’s designed to test the most basic, ‘must know’ knowledge as determined by non-faculty paediatric clini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCrossan, Paddy, Nicholson, Alf, McCallion, Naomi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9131523/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35614439
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03475-8
_version_ 1784713190374899712
author McCrossan, Paddy
Nicholson, Alf
McCallion, Naomi
author_facet McCrossan, Paddy
Nicholson, Alf
McCallion, Naomi
author_sort McCrossan, Paddy
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To ascertain if undergraduate medical students attain adequate knowledge to practice in paediatrics, we designed the minimum accepted competency (MAC) examination. This was a set of MCQ’s designed to test the most basic, ‘must know’ knowledge as determined by non-faculty paediatric clinicians. Only two-thirds of undergraduate students passed this exam, despite 96% of the same cohort passing their official university paediatric examination. We aim to describe the psychometric properties of the MAC examination to explore why there was a difference in student performance between these two assessments which should, in theory, be testing the same subject area. We will also investigate if the MAC examination is a potentially reliable method of assessing undergraduate knowledge. METHODS: The MAC examination was sat by three groups of undergraduate medical students and paediatric trainee doctors. Test item analysis was performed using facility index, discrimination index and Cronbach’s alpha. RESULTS: Test item difficulty on the MAC between each group was positively correlated. Correlation of item difficulty with the standard set for each item showed a statistically significant positive relationship. However, for 10 of the items, the mean score achieved by the candidates did not even reach two standard deviations below the standard set by the faculty. Medical students outperformed the trainee doctors on three items. 18 of 30 items achieved a discrimination index > 0.2. Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.22–0.59. CONCLUSION: Despite faculty correctly judging that this would be a difficult paper for the candidates, there were a significant number of items on which students performed particularly badly. It is possible that the clinical emphasis in these non-faculty derived questions was juxtaposed with the factual recall often required for university examinations. The MAC examination highlights the difference in the level of knowledge expected of a junior doctor starting work in paediatrics between faculty and non-faculty clinicians and can identify gaps between the current curriculum and the ‘hidden curriculum’ required for real world clinical practice. The faculty comprises physicians in employment by the University whose role it is to design the paediatric curriculum and deliver teaching to undergraduate students. Non-faculty clinicians are paediatric physicians who work soley as clinicians with no affiliation to an educational institution. The concept of a MAC examination to test basic medical knowledge is feasible and the study presented is an encouraging first step towards this method of assessment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03475-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9131523
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91315232022-05-26 Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis McCrossan, Paddy Nicholson, Alf McCallion, Naomi BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: To ascertain if undergraduate medical students attain adequate knowledge to practice in paediatrics, we designed the minimum accepted competency (MAC) examination. This was a set of MCQ’s designed to test the most basic, ‘must know’ knowledge as determined by non-faculty paediatric clinicians. Only two-thirds of undergraduate students passed this exam, despite 96% of the same cohort passing their official university paediatric examination. We aim to describe the psychometric properties of the MAC examination to explore why there was a difference in student performance between these two assessments which should, in theory, be testing the same subject area. We will also investigate if the MAC examination is a potentially reliable method of assessing undergraduate knowledge. METHODS: The MAC examination was sat by three groups of undergraduate medical students and paediatric trainee doctors. Test item analysis was performed using facility index, discrimination index and Cronbach’s alpha. RESULTS: Test item difficulty on the MAC between each group was positively correlated. Correlation of item difficulty with the standard set for each item showed a statistically significant positive relationship. However, for 10 of the items, the mean score achieved by the candidates did not even reach two standard deviations below the standard set by the faculty. Medical students outperformed the trainee doctors on three items. 18 of 30 items achieved a discrimination index > 0.2. Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.22–0.59. CONCLUSION: Despite faculty correctly judging that this would be a difficult paper for the candidates, there were a significant number of items on which students performed particularly badly. It is possible that the clinical emphasis in these non-faculty derived questions was juxtaposed with the factual recall often required for university examinations. The MAC examination highlights the difference in the level of knowledge expected of a junior doctor starting work in paediatrics between faculty and non-faculty clinicians and can identify gaps between the current curriculum and the ‘hidden curriculum’ required for real world clinical practice. The faculty comprises physicians in employment by the University whose role it is to design the paediatric curriculum and deliver teaching to undergraduate students. Non-faculty clinicians are paediatric physicians who work soley as clinicians with no affiliation to an educational institution. The concept of a MAC examination to test basic medical knowledge is feasible and the study presented is an encouraging first step towards this method of assessment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-022-03475-8. BioMed Central 2022-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9131523/ /pubmed/35614439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03475-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
McCrossan, Paddy
Nicholson, Alf
McCallion, Naomi
Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title_full Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title_fullStr Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title_full_unstemmed Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title_short Minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
title_sort minimum accepted competency examination: test item analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9131523/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35614439
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03475-8
work_keys_str_mv AT mccrossanpaddy minimumacceptedcompetencyexaminationtestitemanalysis
AT nicholsonalf minimumacceptedcompetencyexaminationtestitemanalysis
AT mccallionnaomi minimumacceptedcompetencyexaminationtestitemanalysis