Objectives: To analyze the low to medium distractor efficiency items in a multiple-choice question (MCQ) paper for item writing flaws. Methods: This qualitative study was conducted at Islamic International Medical College Rawalpindi, in October 2019. Archived item- analysis report from a midyear medium stakes MCQ paper of 2nd year MBBS class, was analyzed to determine the non-functional distractors (NFDs) and distractor efficiency (DE) of items, in a total of 181 MCQs. DE was categorized as low (3-4 NFDs), medium (1-2 NFDs) and high (0 NFD). Subsequently, qualitative document analysis of the MCQ paper whose item analysis report was assessed was conducted to investigate the item flaws in the low to medium DE items. The flaws identified were coded and grouped as, within option flaws, alignment flaws between options and stem/ lead-in and other flaws. Results: Distractor efficiency was high in 69 items (38%), moderate in 75 items (42%) and low in 37 items (20%). The item-writing flaws identified in low to moderate DE items within distractors included, non-homogenous length (1.8%), non-homogenous content (8%) and repeat in distractor (1.7%). Alignment flaws between distractors and stem/ lead-in identified were linguistic cues (10%), logic cues (12.5%) and irrelevant distractors (16%). Flaws unrelated to distractors were low cognitive level items (40%) and unnecessarily complicated stems (11.6%). Conclusions: Analyzing the low to medium DE items for item writing flaws, provides valuable information about item writing errors which negatively impact the distractor efficiency. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.5.2439 How to cite this:Sajjad M, Iltaf S, Khan RA. Nonfunctional distractor analysis: An indicator for?quality?of?Multiple choice questions. Pak J Med Sci. 2020;36(5):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.5.2439 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
展开▼
机译：目的：分析一份多项选择问题（MCQ）纸中的低至中等分散的效率项目，用于物品写入缺陷。方法：在2019年10月，在伊斯兰国际医学院进行了定性研究。分析了第2年MBBS类MCQ纸的存档项目分析报告，确定了非功能性的分心剂（NFDS）和分散注意力物品的效率（DE），总共181个MCQ。 DE分为低（3-4个NFDS），中等（1-2 NFD）和高（0 NFD）。随后，进行了评估项目分析报告的MCQ文件的定性文件分析，以调查低至中等项目中的项目缺陷。所识别的缺陷被编码并分组为在选项缺陷内，选项和茎/铅和其他缺陷之间的对齐缺陷。结果：69件物品（38％），75件物品中适中（42％）和37件（20％）的疗效效率高。在较低的物品写入缺陷，在干扰器中达到中等项目，包括非均匀长度（1.8％），非均匀含量（8％），并在分散组中重复（1.7％）。鉴定的分散剂和茎/铅之间的对准缺陷是语言线索（10％），逻辑线索（12.5％）和无关的干扰剂（16％）。与分散注意力无关的缺陷是低认知水平项目（40％）和不必要的复杂茎（11.6％）。结论：分析项目写入缺陷的低至中等项目，提供有关项目写入误差的有价值的信息，这对令人作呕的效率产生负面影响。 doi：https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.5.2439如何引用这一点：Sajjad M，Iltaf S，Khan Ra。非功能性牵缩者分析：一个指标？质量？？多项选择题。 Pak J Med Sci。 2020; 36（5）：---------。 DOI：https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.36.5.2439这是一个开放的访问文章，根据Creative Commons归因许可证（http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0）分发只要正确引用原始工作，允许在任何媒体中不受限制使用，分发和再现。
展开▼
