ArticlePerspectives on medical education2023
Developing Computerized Adaptive Testing for a National Health Professionals Exam: An Attempt from Psychometric Simulations.
Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging computerized adaptive testing for cost-effective evaluation of large language models in medical benchmarking.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Development and initial validation of a computerized adaptive test prototype for ECG interpretation using item response theory.PloS one · 2026Article
- Fast, smart, and adaptive: using machine learning to optimize mental health assessment and monitor change over time.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- AI-enhanced adaptive testing with cognitive diagnostic feedback and its association with performance in undergraduate surgical education: a pilot study.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- The legality and appropriateness of keeping Korean Medical Licensing Examination items confidential: a comparative analysis and review of court rulingsJournal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The accurate assessment of health professionals' competence is critical for ensuring public health safety and quality of care. Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) based on the Item Response Theory (IRT) has the potential to improve measurement accuracy and reduce respondent burden. In this study, we conducted psychometric simulations to develop a CAT for evaluating the candidates' competence of health professionals. Methods: The initial CAT item bank was sourced from the Standardized Competence Test for Clinical Medicine Undergraduates (SCTCMU), a nationwide summative test in China, consisting of 300 multiple-choice items. We randomly selected response data from 2000 Chinese clinical medicine undergraduates for analysis. Two types of analyses were performed: first, evaluating the psychometric properties of all items to meet the requirements of CAT; and second, conducting multiple CAT simulations using both simulated and real response data. Results: The final CAT item bank consisted of 121 items, for which item parameters were calculated using a two-parameter logistic model (2PLM). The CAT simulations, based on both simulated and real data, revealed sufficient marginal reliability (coefficient of marginal reliability above 0.750) and criterion-related validity (Pearson's correlations between CAT scores and aggregate scores of the SCTCMU exceeding 0.850). Discussion: In national-level medical education assessment, there is an increasing need for concise yet valid evaluations of candidates' competence of health professionals. The CAT developed in this study demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity, offering a more efficient assessment of candidates' competence of health professionals. The psychometric properties of the CAT could lead to shorter test durations, reduced information loss, and a decreased testing burden for participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.