Neil G Haycocks, Jessica Hernandez-Moreno, Johan C Bester, Robert Hernandez, Rosalie Kalili, Daman Samrao, Edward Simanton, Thomas A Vida
{"title":"通过多项选择题评估事实性和概念性知识的难度和长期记忆:一项纵向研究。","authors":"Neil G Haycocks, Jessica Hernandez-Moreno, Johan C Bester, Robert Hernandez, Rosalie Kalili, Daman Samrao, Edward Simanton, Thomas A Vida","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S478193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are the mainstay in examinations for medical education, physician licensing, and board certification. Traditionally, MCQs tend to test rote recall of memorized facts. Their utility in assessing higher cognitive functions has been more problematic to determine. This work evaluates and compares the difficulty and long-term retention of factual versus conceptual knowledge using multiple-choice questions in a longitudinal study.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We classified a series of MCQs into two groups to test recall/verbatim and conceptual/inferential thinking, respectively. We used the MCQs to test a two-part hypothesis: 1) scores for recall/verbatim questions would be significantly higher than for concept/inference questions, and 2) memory loss over time would be more significant for factual knowledge than conceptual understanding compared with a loss in the ability to reason about concepts critically. We first used the MCQs with pre-clinical medical students on a summative exam in 2020, which served as a retrospective benchmark of their performance characteristics. After two years, the same questions were re-administered to volunteers from the same cohort of students in 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Retrospective analysis revealed that recall/verbatim questions were answered correctly more frequently (82.0% vs 60.9%, P = 0.002). Performance on concept/inference questions showed a significant decline, but a larger decline was observed for recall/verbatim questions after two years. Performance on concept/inference questions showed a slight decline across quartiles, while two years later, recall/verbatim questions experienced substantial performance loss. Subgroup analysis indicated convergence in performance on both question types, suggesting that the clinical relevance of the MCQ content may have influenced a regression toward a baseline mean.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest conceptual/inferential thinking is more complex than rote memorization. However, the knowledge acquired is more durable in a longitudinal fashion, especially if it is reinforced in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"15 ","pages":"1217-1228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11653852/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the Difficulty and Long-Term Retention of Factual and Conceptual Knowledge Through Multiple-Choice Questions: A Longitudinal Study.\",\"authors\":\"Neil G Haycocks, Jessica Hernandez-Moreno, Johan C Bester, Robert Hernandez, Rosalie Kalili, Daman Samrao, Edward Simanton, Thomas A Vida\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/AMEP.S478193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are the mainstay in examinations for medical education, physician licensing, and board certification. Traditionally, MCQs tend to test rote recall of memorized facts. Their utility in assessing higher cognitive functions has been more problematic to determine. This work evaluates and compares the difficulty and long-term retention of factual versus conceptual knowledge using multiple-choice questions in a longitudinal study.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We classified a series of MCQs into two groups to test recall/verbatim and conceptual/inferential thinking, respectively. We used the MCQs to test a two-part hypothesis: 1) scores for recall/verbatim questions would be significantly higher than for concept/inference questions, and 2) memory loss over time would be more significant for factual knowledge than conceptual understanding compared with a loss in the ability to reason about concepts critically. We first used the MCQs with pre-clinical medical students on a summative exam in 2020, which served as a retrospective benchmark of their performance characteristics. After two years, the same questions were re-administered to volunteers from the same cohort of students in 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Retrospective analysis revealed that recall/verbatim questions were answered correctly more frequently (82.0% vs 60.9%, P = 0.002). Performance on concept/inference questions showed a significant decline, but a larger decline was observed for recall/verbatim questions after two years. Performance on concept/inference questions showed a slight decline across quartiles, while two years later, recall/verbatim questions experienced substantial performance loss. Subgroup analysis indicated convergence in performance on both question types, suggesting that the clinical relevance of the MCQ content may have influenced a regression toward a baseline mean.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest conceptual/inferential thinking is more complex than rote memorization. However, the knowledge acquired is more durable in a longitudinal fashion, especially if it is reinforced in clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"1217-1228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11653852/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Medical Education and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S478193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S478193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:多项选择题(mcq)是医学教育、医师执照和委员会认证考试的主要内容。传统上,mcq倾向于测试死记硬背的记忆。它们在评估高级认知功能方面的效用还有待确定。这项工作评估和比较的困难和长期保留的事实知识和概念知识使用多项选择题在纵向研究。患者和方法:我们将一系列mcq分为两组,分别测试回忆/逐字和概念/推理思维。我们用mcq测试了一个两部分的假设:1)回忆/逐字问题的得分明显高于概念/推理问题,2)与批判性推理能力的丧失相比,随着时间的推移,事实知识的记忆丧失比概念理解的记忆丧失更为显著。我们首先在2020年的总结性考试中对临床预科医学生使用mcq,作为他们表现特征的回顾性基准。两年后,同样的问题在2020年再次被分配给来自同一群学生的志愿者。结果:回顾性分析显示,回忆/逐字问题的正确率更高(82.0% vs 60.9%, P = 0.002)。在概念/推理问题上的表现明显下降,但在两年后,在回忆/逐字问题上的表现下降更大。在概念/推理问题上的表现在四分位数上略有下降,而两年后,回忆/逐字问题的表现则大幅下降。亚组分析表明,在这两种问题类型上的表现趋同,这表明MCQ内容的临床相关性可能影响了向基线平均值的回归。结论:这些发现表明概念/推理思维比死记硬背更复杂。然而,获得的知识在纵向上更持久,特别是如果它在临床环境中得到加强。
Assessing the Difficulty and Long-Term Retention of Factual and Conceptual Knowledge Through Multiple-Choice Questions: A Longitudinal Study.
Purpose: Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are the mainstay in examinations for medical education, physician licensing, and board certification. Traditionally, MCQs tend to test rote recall of memorized facts. Their utility in assessing higher cognitive functions has been more problematic to determine. This work evaluates and compares the difficulty and long-term retention of factual versus conceptual knowledge using multiple-choice questions in a longitudinal study.
Patients and methods: We classified a series of MCQs into two groups to test recall/verbatim and conceptual/inferential thinking, respectively. We used the MCQs to test a two-part hypothesis: 1) scores for recall/verbatim questions would be significantly higher than for concept/inference questions, and 2) memory loss over time would be more significant for factual knowledge than conceptual understanding compared with a loss in the ability to reason about concepts critically. We first used the MCQs with pre-clinical medical students on a summative exam in 2020, which served as a retrospective benchmark of their performance characteristics. After two years, the same questions were re-administered to volunteers from the same cohort of students in 2020.
Results: Retrospective analysis revealed that recall/verbatim questions were answered correctly more frequently (82.0% vs 60.9%, P = 0.002). Performance on concept/inference questions showed a significant decline, but a larger decline was observed for recall/verbatim questions after two years. Performance on concept/inference questions showed a slight decline across quartiles, while two years later, recall/verbatim questions experienced substantial performance loss. Subgroup analysis indicated convergence in performance on both question types, suggesting that the clinical relevance of the MCQ content may have influenced a regression toward a baseline mean.
Conclusion: These findings suggest conceptual/inferential thinking is more complex than rote memorization. However, the knowledge acquired is more durable in a longitudinal fashion, especially if it is reinforced in clinical settings.