Key result
Open-book multiple choice tests demonstrated satisfactory distribution characteristics and concordance with usual closed-book tests among first-year health studies students.
Cross-Sectional (n=190)
No
Open-book tests have satisfactory distribution characteristics and show concordance with usual tests, supporting their use to promote reflection and deep learning in medical education.
May support piloting open-book tests in medical education; leaves open impact on reflection, deep learning, and clinical competence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cade et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Medical education (n=190). Open-book Multiple Choice Format tests (OBT) vs. Usual tests (CC) was evaluated on Docimological features (distribution characteristics). Open-book multiple choice tests demonstrated satisfactory distribution characteristics and concordance with usual closed-book tests among first-year health studies students.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: