Trial reportBMC medical education2024
The battle of question formats: a comparative study of retrieval practice using very short answer questions and multiple choice questions.
Trial report 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.
- Exploring the length and time related concepts for scenario-based multiple-choice questions through perspectives of medical education experts: a mixed-method approach.Korean journal of medical education · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetrieval practice is a highly effective learning strategy that enhances long-term retention by encouraging the active recall of information. However, the optimal question format for maximizing knowledge retention remains uncertain. In this study, we compared the effect of very short answer (VSAQ) versus multiple-choice question (MCQ) practice tests on students' knowledge retention. By analyzing these two formats, we aim to identify the most effective approach to retrieval practice, thereby helping to optimize its implementation and improve learning outcomes.
methodsIn this randomized within-subjects study, students (n = 45) practiced with both VSAQs and MCQs in an extracurricular lifestyle course, without receiving feedback. The final retention test consisted of identical questions in both formats. A 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine the effect of question format in practice testing and final test on final test score. Additionally, digital questionnaires were used to explore students' test-taking experiences.
resultsThe VSAQs were answered incorrectly more frequently on the practice tests and final test. There was no main effect of practice question format on final test performance, and no interaction effect between question format on the practice and final test. Regardless of question format, most students thought the practice tests were beneficial for learning.
conclusionsWe found no evidence indicating that either MCQ or VSAQ is more effective for knowledge retention during retrieval practice. The lower initial retrieval success in the VSAQs, indicated by the higher degree of incorrect answers on the practice tests, might have limited their effectiveness during retrieval practice. To optimize the use of VSAQs in retrieval practice, it seems important to improve initial retrieval success to maximize learning outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.