Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39637351›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2024

Evaluation of a Computer-Based Morphological Analysis Method for Free-Text Responses in the General Medicine In-Training Examination: Algorithm Validation Study.

Daiki Yokokawa, Kiyoshi Shikino, Yuji Nishizaki, Sho Fukui, Yasuharu Tokuda

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Daiki Yokokawa *Department of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0944-8664
Kiyoshi Shikino *Department of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3721-3443
Yuji Nishizaki *Division of Medical Education, Juntendo University School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan, 81 3-3813-3111, 81 3-5689-0627.ORCID 0000-0002-6964-6702
Sho Fukui *Department of Emergency and General Medicine, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3082-1374
Yasuharu Tokuda *Muribushi Okinawa Center for Teaching Hospitals, Okinawa, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9325-7934

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The General Medicine In-Training Examination (GM-ITE) tests clinical knowledge in a 2-year postgraduate residency program in Japan. In the academic year 2021, as a domain of medical safety, the GM-ITE included questions regarding the diagnosis from medical history and physical findings through video viewing and the skills in presenting a case. Examinees watched a video or audio recording of a patient examination and provided free-text responses. However, the human cost of scoring free-text answers may limit the implementation of GM-ITE. A simple morphological analysis and word-matching model, thus, can be used to score free-text responses. Objective: This study aimed to compare human versus computer scoring of free-text responses and qualitatively evaluate the discrepancies between human- and machine-generated scores to assess the efficacy of machine scoring. Methods: After obtaining consent for participation in the study, the authors used text data from residents who voluntarily answered the GM-ITE patient reproduction video-based questions involving simulated patients. The GM-ITE used video-based questions to simulate a patient's consultation in the emergency room with a diagnosis of pulmonary embolism following a fracture. Residents provided statements for the case presentation. We obtained human-generated scores by collating the results of 2 independent scorers and machine-generated scores by converting the free-text responses into a word sequence through segmentation and morphological analysis and matching them with a prepared list of correct answers in 2022. Results: Of the 104 responses collected-63 for postgraduate year 1 and 41 for postgraduate year 2-39 cases remained for final analysis after excluding invalid responses. The authors found discrepancies between human and machine scoring in 14 questions (7.2%); some were due to shortcomings in machine scoring that could be resolved by maintaining a list of correct words and dictionaries, whereas others were due to human error. Conclusions: Machine scoring is comparable to human scoring. It requires a simple program and calibration but can potentially reduce the cost of scoring free-text responses.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsClinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementInternship and ResidencyEducation, Medical, GraduateGeneral PracticeHumansJapanfree-text responseGeneral Medicine In-Training Examinationmorphological analysisSituation, Background, Assessment, and Recommendationvideo-based question

Identifiers

PMID39637351
PMCPMC11637224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.