Differential Item Functioning Analysis of United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Items

被引:3
|
作者
Rubright, Jonathan D. [1 ]
Jodoin, Michael [2 ]
Woodward, Stephanie [3 ]
Barone, Michael A. [4 ]
机构
[1] Natl Board Med Examiners, Off Res Strategy, Philadelphia, PA USA
[2] Natl Board Med Examiners, US Med Licensing Examinat, Philadelphia, PA USA
[3] Natl Board Med Examiners, 3750 Market St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[4] Natl Board Med Examiners, Competency Based Assessment, Philadelphia, PA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/ACM.0000000000004567
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Purpose Previous studies have examined and identified demographic group score differences on United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step examinations. It is necessary to explore potential etiologies of such differences to ensure fairness of examination use. Although score differences are largely explained by preceding academic variables, one potential concern is that item-level bias may be associated with remaining group score differences. The purpose of this 2019-2020 study was to statistically identify and qualitatively review USMLE Step 1 exam questions (items) using differential item functioning (DIF) methodology. Method Logistic regression DIF was used to identify and classify the effect size of DIF on Step 1 items meeting minimum sample size criteria. After using DIF to flag items statistically, subject matter expert (SME) review was used to identify potential reasons why items may have performed differently between racial and gender groups, including characteristics such as content, format, wording, context, or stimulus materials. USMLE SMEs reviewed items to identify the group difference they believed was present, if any; articulate a rationale behind the group difference; and determine whether that rationale would be considered construct relevant or construct irrelevant. Results All identified DIF rationales were relevant to the constructs being assessed and therefore did not reflect item bias. Where SME-generated rationales aligned with statistical differences (flags), they favored self-identified women on items tagged to women's health content categories and were judged to be construct relevant. Conclusions This study did not find evidence to support the hypothesis that group-level performance differences beyond those explained by prior academic performance variables are driven by item-level bias. Health professions examination programs have an obligation to assess for group differences, and when present, investigate to what extent, if any, measurement bias plays a role.
引用
收藏
页码:718 / 722
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Current Views on the New United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Pass/Fail Format: A Review of the Literature
    Raborn, Layne N.
    Janis, Jeffrey E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2022, 274 : 31 - 45
  • [32] Impact of considering United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 pass/fail on diversity in dermatology residency recruitment
    Grullon, Karina
    Hight, Robert S.
    Goldberg, Ellen M.
    Rosenblatt, Adena E.
    [J]. CLINICS IN DERMATOLOGY, 2023, 41 (01) : 195 - 200
  • [33] Reply: Assessment of Plastic Surgery Residency Applications without United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scores
    Sarac, Benjamin A.
    Gosman, Amanda A.
    Lin, Samuel J.
    Runyan, Christopher M.
    Janis, Jeffrey E.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2022, 150 (04): : 924E - 925E
  • [34] Implications of United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Becoming Pass/Fail on the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match
    Boyd, Carter J.
    Inglesby, Dani C.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 146 (05): : 706E - 707E
  • [35] Reply: Assessment of Plastic Surgery Residency Applications without United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Scores
    Irwin, Timothy J.
    Eberlin, Kyle R.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2022, 150 (03): : 707E - 708E
  • [36] Evaluating the impact of pass/fail United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scoring on pathology residency selection
    Fujihashi, Ayaka
    Yang, Lydia C.
    Haynes, William
    Patel, Om U.
    Burge, Kaitlin
    Yadav, Ishant
    Van Wagoner, Nicholas
    McCleskey, Brandi
    [J]. ACADEMIC PATHOLOGY, 2023, 10 (02):
  • [37] Screening Test Items for Differential Item Functioning
    Longford, Nicholas T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICS, 2014, 39 (01) : 3 - 21
  • [38] Educational Videos Versus Question Banks: Maximizing Medical Student Performance on the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Exam
    Clemmons, Karina R.
    Vuk, Jasna
    Jarrett, Diane M.
    [J]. CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (04)
  • [39] A National Cohort Study of US Medical School Students Who Initially Failed Step 1 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination
    Andriole, Dorothy A.
    Jeffe, Donna B.
    [J]. ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2012, 87 (04) : 529 - 536
  • [40] The Early Impact of Deciding to Take the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 for Osteopathic Medical Students in the Pass/Fail Era
    Hedgepeth, Dylan
    Wlasowicz, Samuel
    Lott, Ronald
    Smith, Travis
    [J]. CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (03)