ArticleBMC medical education2024
Evaluation of modified essay questions (MEQs) as an assessment tool in third-year medical students' modular summative assessment.
Article in BMC 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Using non-linear slide decks to administer individualized problem-based learning assessments within pharmacology education.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimWhether case-based modified essay questions (MEQs) are crucial to summative assessment in medical curriculum is still debatable. The current study aimed to evaluate third-year medical students' performance in case-based MEQs and multiple-choice questions (MCQs) in summative assessment in the endocrine module.
methodsStudents' scores in mid and final module MEQs and MCQs were analyzed over four successive years from 2018/2019 to 2021/2022, where comparisons were made between students' scores in MEQs and MCQs, and between scores of students of different categories. Moreover, the correlation between MEQs and MCQ scores and total grades was evaluated.
resultsThe study revealed better students' performance in MCQs compared to MEQs, and this pattern persisted over the study period reflecting that case-based MEQs were challenging to students. High-performing students got higher scores in MEQs than the low performers, denoting the ability of MEQs to discriminate between high and low grades. It was also observed that MEQs correlated significantly with students' final grades similar to the MCQs indicating its importance as an assessment tool. Concerning the COVID year, students got higher grades in MCQs and lower scores in MEQs compared to other years of the study period which clarifies that MCQs offer a reliable assessment tool during exceptional circumstances.
conclusionImplementing case-based MEQs and MCQs in the summative assessment of medical curriculum favored discrimination between high and low scorers, minimized chances for students' guessing and fostered deep learning and analytical comprehension of knowledge, and ensured medical students' exposure to various item types. The current findings highlight the potential of using well constructed case-based MEQs in high stake medical exams together with MCQs for comprehensive assessments of problem solving 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.