Analyse de la discrimination des notes aux ECN informatisées de 2016
| dc.rights.license | open | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | RIVIERE, E. | |
| dc.contributor.author | QUINTON, A. | |
| hal.structure.identifier | Bordeaux population health [BPH] | |
| dc.contributor.author | DEHAIL, Patrick | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-07-10T10:10:44Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-07-10T10:10:44Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019-05 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0248-8663 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://oskar-bordeaux.fr/handle/20.500.12278/10403 | |
| dc.description.abstractEn | INTRODUCTION: The first computerised national ranking exam (cNRE) in Medicine was introduced in June 2016 for 8214 students. It was made of 18 progressive clinical cases (PCCs) with multiple choice questions (MCQs), 120 independent MCQs and 2 scientific articles to criticize. A lack of mark discrimination grounded the cNRE reform. We aimed to assess the discrimination of the final marks after this first cNRE. METHODS: A national Excel((R)) file gathering overall statistics and marks were transmitted to the medical faculties after the cNRE. The mean points deviation between two papers and the percentage of points ranking 75% of students allowed us to analyse marks' discrimination. RESULTS: The national distribution sigmoid curve of the marks is superimposable with previous NRE in 2015. In PCCs, 72% of students were ranked in 1090 points out of 7560 (14%). In independents MCQs, 73% of students were ranked in 434 points out of 2160 (20%). In critical analysis of articles, 75% of students were ranked in 225 points out of 1080 (21%). The above percentages of students are on the plateau of each discrimination curve for PCCs, independent MCQs and critical analysis of scientific articles. CONCLUSION: The cNRE reduced equally-ranked students compared to 2015, with a mean deviation between two papers of 0.28 in 2016 vs 0.04 in 2015. Despite the new format introduced by the cNRE, 75% of students are still ranked in a low proportion of points that is equivalent to previous NRE in 2015 (between 15 et 20% of points). | |
| dc.language.iso | FR | en_US |
| dc.subject.en | HACS | |
| dc.title | Analyse de la discrimination des notes aux ECN informatisées de 2016 | |
| dc.title.alternative | Rev Med Interne | en_US |
| dc.type | Article de revue | en_US |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.revmed.2018.10.386 | en_US |
| dc.subject.hal | Sciences du Vivant [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie | en_US |
| dc.identifier.pubmed | 30902508 | en_US |
| bordeaux.journal | La Revue de medecine interne | en_US |
| bordeaux.page | 286-290 | en_US |
| bordeaux.volume | 40 | en_US |
| bordeaux.hal.laboratories | Bordeaux Population Health Research Center (BPH) - U1219 | en_US |
| bordeaux.issue | 5 | en_US |
| bordeaux.institution | Université de Bordeaux | en_US |
| bordeaux.peerReviewed | oui | en_US |
| bordeaux.inpress | non | en_US |
| hal.identifier | hal-02896053 | |
| hal.version | 1 | |
| hal.date.transferred | 2020-07-10T10:10:50Z | |
| hal.export | true | |
| bordeaux.COinS | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.title=Analyse%20de%20la%20discrimination%20des%20notes%20aux%20ECN%20informatis%C3%A9es%20de%202016&rft.atitle=Analyse%20de%20la%20discrimination%20des%20notes%20aux%20ECN%20informatis%C3%A9es%20de%202016&rft.jtitle=La%20Revue%20de%20medecine%20interne&rft.date=2019-05&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=286-290&rft.epage=286-290&rft.eissn=0248-8663&rft.issn=0248-8663&rft.au=RIVIERE,%20E.&QUINTON,%20A.&DEHAIL,%20Patrick&rft.genre=article |
Fichier(s) constituant ce document
| Fichiers | Taille | Format | Vue |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Il n'y a pas de fichiers associés à ce document. |
|||