DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20183004

Item analysis to identify quality multiple choice questions/items in an assessment in Pharmacology of II MBBS students in Guntur Medical College of Andhra Pradesh, India

Vijaya K. Suryadevara, Zaheda Bano

Abstract


Background: In medical education, multiple choice questions/Items are the more frequently used assessment tools to assess the knowledge abilities and skills of medical students, for being their objectivity, wide coverage in less time. However only the Quality Items gives a valid and reliable assessment. The quality of an Item is determined by difficulty index (DIF I), Discrimination Index (DI) and Distractor efficiency (DE). Aim of the study was to know the quality of Items in pharmacology by Item analysis and to develop a MCQs bank with quality Items.

Methods: The present study was conducted on 150 II MBBS students of Guntur Medical College, AP, India. A class test containing 50 Items with 150 distractors from topic chemotherapy was conducted. Item with the correct choice/response was awarded with one mark and with the wrong choice zero marks, no negative marks. Each test Item was analysed with DIF I, DI and DE and the results were tabulated and tested statistically, with unpaired "t" test.

Results: Mean DIF I, DI, DE values with standard deviations in the present study are 44.72+17.63%, 0.30+0.12%, 84.48+24.65 respectively. DIF I of 32 (64%) items was good to excellent range (31%-60%) 9 (18%) Items were easy (>61%) and 9(18%) Items were difficult (>30%). DI of 10 (20%) Items was good (0.15 to 0.24.) 29 (58%) Items were excellent with DI > 0.25 and 11 (22%) Items were poor with DI <0.15. Among 150 distractors, 127 (85%) were functional distractors (FDs) and 23 (15%) were non-functional distractors (NFDs). DE of 33 (66%) items with nil NFDs was 100%, for 12 (24%) Items with one NFD, was 66.6%, for 4 (8%) items with 2 NFDs was 33.3% and for 1 (2%) Item with 3NFDs DE was 0%. When unpaired "t" test was applied to the means of "difficult" and "easy" Items, 96.22+11.33% SD, 51.44+29.31% SD respectively, the p-value obtained was 0.00058, which was highly significant.

Conclusions: The study showed that Item analysis is a valid tool to identify quality Items, which assess, the students’ knowledge abilities and discriminate different levels of performance abilities of students effectively.


Keywords


Assessment, Difficulty index, Discrimination index, Distractor efficiency, Item analysis, Non-functional distractor

Full Text:

PDF

References


Gajjar S, Sharma R, Kumar P, Rana M. Item and Test Analysis to Identify Quality Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) from an Assessment of Medical Students of Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Indian Journal of Community Medicine: Official Publication of Indian Association of Preventive and Social Medicine. 2014;39(1):17-20.

Kemp JE, Morrison GR, Ross SM. Developing evaluation instruments. Designing Effective Instruction. New York: MacMillan College Publishing Company; 1994:180-213.

Sarin YK, Khurana M, Natu MV, Thomas AG, Singh T. Item analysis of published MCQs. Indian Pediatr. 1998:35:1103-5. (PubMed:10216545).

Tarrant M, Ware J, Mohammed AM. An assessment of functioning and non functioning distractors in multiple choice questions: A descriptive analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2009:9:1-8. (PMCID:PMC2713226) (PubMed: 19580681)

Hingorjo MR, Jaleel F. Analysis of one-best MCQs: The difficulty index, discrimination index and distracter efficiency. J Pak Med Assoc. 2012;62(2):142-7.

Kaur M, Singla S, Mahajan R. Item analysis of in use multiple choice questions in pharmacology. Int J App Bas Med Resear. 2016;6(3):170-3.

Singh T, Gupta P, Singh D. Test and item analysis. Principles of Medical Education. 3rd ed. New Delhi, Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd; 2009:70-77.

Namdeo SK, Sahoo B. Item analysis of multiple choice questions from an assessment of medical students in Bhubaneswar, India. Int J Res Med Scienc. 2016 Dec 30;4(5):1716-9.

Sidine J Botti M, Thomas S. Design, format, Validity and reliability of multiple choice questions for use in nursing research and education. Collegian. 2005;12:19-24.

Skakun EN, Nanson EM, Kling S, Taylor WC. A preliminary investigation of three types of multiple choice questions. Med Educ. 1979;13:91-6 [PubMed].

Menon AR, Kannambra PN. Item Analysis to Identify Quality Multiple Choice Questions. NJLM. 2017;6(2):MO07-10.

Patil VC, Patil HV. Item analysis of medicine multiple choice questions (MCQs) for under graduate (3rd yr MBBS) students. Res J Pharm Biol Chem Sci. 2015;6:1242-51.

Mehta G, Mokhasi V. Item analysis of multiple choice questions - An assessment of the assessment tool. Int J Health Sci Res. 2014;4:197-202.