Showing 41 - 49 of 49 Research Library Publications
Posted: | D. Jurich, L. M. Duhigg, T. J. Plumb, S. A. Haist, J. L. Hawley, R. S. Lipner, L. Smith, S. M. Norby

CJASN May 2018, 13 (5) 710-717

 

Medical specialty and subspecialty fellowship programs administer subject-specific in-training examinations to provide feedback about level of medical knowledge to fellows preparing for subsequent board certification. This study evaluated the association between the American Society of Nephrology In-Training Examination and the American Board of Internal Medicine Nephrology Certification Examination in terms of scores and passing status.

Posted: | K. Short, S. D. Bucak, F. Rosenthal, M. R. Raymond

Academic Medicine: May 2018 - Volume 93 - Issue 5 - p 781-785

 

In 2007, the United States Medical Licensing Examination embedded multimedia simulations of heart sounds into multiple-choice questions. This study investigated changes in item difficulty as determined by examinee performance over time. The data reflect outcomes obtained following initial use of multimedia items from 2007 through 2012, after which an interface change occurred.

Posted: | S. D. Stites, J. D. Rubright, J. Karlawish

Alzheimer's & Dementia, 14: 925-932

 

The purpose of this survey is to understand how the prevalence of beliefs, attitudes, and expectations about Alzheimer's disease dementia in the public could inform strategies to mitigate stigma.

Posted: | B. Michalec, M. M. Cuddy, P. Hafferty, M. D. Hanson, S. L. Kanter, D. Littleton, M. A. T. Martimianakis, R. Michaels, F. W. Hafferty

Med Educ, 52: 359-361

 

Focusing specifically on examples set in the context of movement from Bachelor's level undergraduate programmes to enrolment in medical school, this publication argues that a great deal of what happens on college campuses today, curricular and otherwise, is (in)directly driven by the not‐so‐invisible hand of the medical education enterprise.

Posted: | R.A. Feinberg, D. Jurich, J. Lord, H. Case, J. Hawley

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 2018 45:3, 381-387

 

This study uses item response data from the November–December 2014 and April 2015 NAVLE administrations (n =5,292), to conduct timing analyses comparing performance across several examinee subgroups. The results provide evidence that conditions were sufficient for most examinees, thereby supporting the current time limits. For the relatively few examinees who may have been impacted, results suggest the cause is not a bias with the test but rather the effect of poor pacing behavior combined with knowledge deficits.

Posted: | E. S. Miller, C. Heitz, L. Ross, M. S. Beeson

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.

Posted: | Monica M. Cuddy, Aaron Young, Andrew Gelman, David B. Swanson, David A. Johnson, Gerard F. Dillon, Brian E. Clauser

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.

Posted: | K. Walsh, P. Harik, K. Mazor, D. Perfetto, M. Anatchkova, C. Biggins, J. Wagner

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.

Posted: | Ruth B. Hoppe, Ann M. King, Kathleen M. Mazor, Gail E. Furman, Penelope Wick-Garcia, Heather Corcoran–Ponisciak, Peter J. Katsufrakis

Academic Medicine: Volume 88 - Issue 11 - p 1670-1675

 

From 2007 through 2012, the NBME team reviewed literature in physician–patient communication, examined performance characteristics of the Step 2 CS exam, observed case development and quality assurance processes, interviewed SPs and their trainers, and reviewed video recordings of examinee–SP interactions.  The authors describe perspectives gained by their team from the review process and outline the resulting enhancements to the Step 2 CS exam, some of which were rolled out in June 2012.