Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42017066›Full record

ArticleAcademic pathology

A comparison of free-response and multiple-choice questions on the American Board of Pathology primary certification examinations.

Gary W Procop, Ty McCarthy, Anthony Schlinsog, Mohiedean Ghofrani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic pathology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Gary W ProcopAmerican Board of Pathology, Tampa, FL, USA.
Ty McCarthyAmerican Board of Pathology, Tampa, FL, USA.
Anthony SchlinsogAmerican Board of Pathology, Tampa, FL, USA.
Mohiedean GhofraniPeaceHealth Southwest Medical Center, Vancouver, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The American Board of Pathology is exploring alternate forms of assessment, and herein has undertaken a comparison between free-response, short-answer questions with paired, construct-equivalent standard multiple-choice, closed-response questions. Four short-answer, free-response questions were compared with four paired multiple-choice, closed-response questions that had equivalent stems and measured the same constructs. The percentage correct responses of the paired question types were compared using chi square analysis, with a level of significance set at

Indexed as

Board certificationFree-response questionsMultiple-choice questions

Identifiers

PMID42017066
PMCPMC13092660

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.