ArticleCureus2023
Assessment of the Quality of Multiple-Choice Questions in the Surgery Course for an Integrated Curriculum, University of Bisha College of Medicine, Saudi Arabia.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Item analysis and performance of EMQ, MCQ, and SAQ in dental education and students' perception of extended-matching questions.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Comparison of AI-generated and clinician-designed multiple-choice questions in emergency medicine exam: a psychometric analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Challenging the curve: can ChatGPT-generated MCQs reduce grade inflation in pharmacy education.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMultiple-choice questions (MCQs) have been recognized as reliable assessment tools, and incorporating clinical scenarios in MCQ stems has enhanced their effectiveness in evaluating knowledge and understanding. Item analysis is used to assess the reliability and consistency of MCQs, indicating their suitability as an assessment tool. This study aims to ensure the competence of graduates in serving the community and establish an examination bank for the surgery course.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the quality and acceptability of MCQs in the surgery course at the University of Bisha College of Medicine (UBCOM).
methodsA psychometric study evaluated the quality of MCQs used in surgery examinations from 2019 to 2023 at UBCOM in Saudi Arabia. The MCQs/items were analyzed and categorized for their difficulty index (DIF), discrimination index (DI), and distracter efficiency (DE) Fifth-year MBBS students undergo a rotation in the department and are assessed at the end of 12 weeks. The assessment includes 60 MCQs/items and written items. Data was collected and analyzed using SPSS version 24.
resultsA total of 189 students were examined across five test sessions, with 300 MCQ items. Student scores ranged from 28.33% to 90.0%, with an average score of 64.6%±4.35. The 300 MCQ items had a total of 900 distractors. The DIF was 75.3% for the items, and 63.3% of the items showed good discrimination. No items had negative points in terms of biserial correlation. The mean number of functional distractors per test item was 2.19±1.007, with 34% of the items having three functional distractors.
conclusionThe psychometric indices used to evaluate the MCQs in this study were encouraging, with acceptable DIF, distractor efficiencies, and item reliability. Providing robust faculty training and capacity-building is recommended to enhance item development skills.
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.