IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0224131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation and perception of a key feature problem examination in neurology

Author

Listed:
  • Meike Grumer
  • Peter Brüstle
  • Johann Lambeck
  • Silke Biller
  • Jochen Brich

Abstract

Objective: To validate a newly-developed Key Feature Problem Examination (KFPE) in neurology, and to examine how it is perceived by students. Methods: We have developed a formative KFPE containing 12 key feature problems and 44 key feature items. The key feature problems covered four typical clinical situations. The items were presented in short- and long-menu question formats. Third- and fourth-year medical students undergoing the Neurology Course at our department participated in this study. The students' perception of the KFPE was assessed via a questionnaire. Students also had to pass a summative multiple-choice question examination (MCQE) containing 39 Type-A questions. All key feature and multiple-choice questions were classified using a modified Bloom’s taxonomy. Results: The results from 81 KFPE participants were analyzed. The average score was 6.7/12 points. Cronbach’s alpha for the 12 key-feature problems was 0.53. Item difficulty level scores were between 0.39 and 0.77, and item-total correlations between 0.05 and 0.36. Thirty-two key feature items of the KFPE were categorized as testers of comprehension, application and problem-solving, and 12 questions as testers of knowledge (MCQE: 15 comprehension and 24 knowledge, respectively). Overall correlations between the KFPE and the MCQE were intermediate. The KFPE was perceived well by the students. Conclusions: Adherence to previously-established principles enables the creation of a valid KFPE in the field of Neurology.

Suggested Citation

  • Meike Grumer & Peter Brüstle & Johann Lambeck & Silke Biller & Jochen Brich, 2019. "Validation and perception of a key feature problem examination in neurology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-12, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224131
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224131
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224131&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0224131?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.