RESEARCH LIBRARY

Handbook of Automated Scoring

In this chapter we describe the historical background that led to development of the simulations and the subsequent refinement of the construct that occurred as the interface was being developed. We then describe the evolution of the automated scoring procedures from linear regression modeling to rule-based procedures.

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 39: 30-36

This article proposes the conscious weight method and subconscious weight method to bring more objectivity to the standard setting process. To do this, these methods quantify the relative harm of the negative consequences of false positive and false negative misclassification.

Academic Medicine: Volume 95 - Issue 1 - p 111-121

This paper investigates the effect of a change in the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 timing on Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores, the effect of lag time on Step 2 CK performance, and the relationship of incoming Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score to Step 2 CK performance pre and post change.

Western Journal of Emergency Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health, 19(1)

This review is a descriptive summary of the development of National EM M4 examinations, Version 1 (V1) and Version 2 (V2), and the NBME EM Advanced Clinical Examination (ACE) and their relevant usage and performance data. In particular, it describes how examination content was edited to affect desired changes in examination performance data and offers a model for educators seeking to develop their own examinations.

The authors examined the extent to which USMLE scores relate to the odds of receiving a disciplinary action from a U.S. state medical board.

Qual Life Res 27, 1711–1720 (2018)

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as part of its regulatory mission, is charged with determining whether a clinical outcome assessment (COA) is “fit for purpose” when used in clinical trials to support drug approval and product labeling. This paper provides a review (and some commentary) on the current state of affairs in COA development/evaluation/use with a focus on one aspect: How do you know you are measuring the right thing? In the psychometric literature, this concept is referred to broadly as validity and has itself evolved over many years of research and application.

Medical Care: April 2017 - Volume 55 - Issue 4 - p 436-441

The objective of this study is to identify modifiable factors that improve the reliability of ratings of severity of health care–associated harm in clinical practice improvement and research.