Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Development and Validation of a Shared Secure Biochemistry Test Bank for Medical, Dental, and Pharmacy Schools

  • Original research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A shared secure biochemistry test bank (abeQbank) was developed by 61 members of the Association of Biochemistry Educators (ABE) who are from medical, pharmacy, and dental schools. The initial abeQbank contained 305 questions, which were almost all clinical vignettes, and were classified into 9 biochemistry megaThemes with subthemes as determined by ABE workshops 2009–2011. Three medical schools selected 163 board-style abeQbank questions approved by ABE and administered a proctored formative exam using ExamSoft to 97 second-year medical students prior to their USMLE or COMLEX 1 board exam followed by a review session in which students examined their answers and read the rationale for each question. The goals of this project were to (1) provide a resource to biochemistry educators; (2) evaluate the quality of these questions; and (3) ascertain students’ relative knowledge in different biochemical concepts. Individual questions and 9 megaTheme groups performed similarly across schools, with the lowest and highest megaThemes ranging from 40 to 70% correct. Five questions were dropped due to miscoding, poor metrics, or questionable distractors requiring a rewrite. The results showed that the examination was strongly reliable with the average KR20 = 0.85, discrimination index and point-biserial > 0.2, and students scoring the examination 8 out of 10 in usefulness. This test bank represents the first attempt by an international biochemistry organization to create a standardized set of questions, with future expansion planned to help standardize the content of biochemistry topics in the curricula.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fulton TB, Ronner P, Lindsley JE. Medical biochemistry in the era of competencies: is it time for the Krebs cycle to go? Med Sci Educ. 2012;22(1):29–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Niederhoffer EC, Cline SD, Osheroff N, Simmons JM, Diekman AB, Franklin DS, et al. Teaching biochemistry and genetics to students of dentistry, medicine, and pharmacy 6th International Conference of the Association of Biochemistry Educators (ABE) Clearwater Beach, FL, USA, May 7–11, 2017. Med Sci Educ. 2017;27(4):855–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bloom BS. Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: cognitive domain. 2nd Edition edition. Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd; 1956.

  4. Hochlehnert A, Brass K, Möltner A, Schultz J-H, Norcini J, Tekian A, et al. Good exams made easy: the item management system for multiple examination formats. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12:63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schuwirth L, Bosman G, Henning RH, Rinkel R, Wenink ACG. Collaboration on progress testing in medical schools in the Netherlands. Med Teach. 2010;32(6):476–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kelly T, Ebel R, Linacre J. Item Discrimination indices [Internet]. Item Discrimination Indices. 2002 [cited 2019 Mar 11]. Available from: https://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt163a.htm

  7. Ebel RL. Procedures for the analysis of classroom tests. Educ Psychol Meas. 1954;14(2):352–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Woods NN, Neville AJ, Levinson AJ, Howey EHA, Oczkowski WJ, Norman GR. The value of basic science in clinical diagnosis. Acad Med. 2006 Oct;81(10 Suppl):S124–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Woods NN. Science is fundamental: the role of biomedical knowledge in clinical reasoning. Med Educ. 2007;41(12):1173–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sage Arbor.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This project received IRB waivers from the IRB at all three participating schools Marian, Rutgers, and Touro).

Informed Consent

This was a retrospective analysis without individual identifiable information, and we cleared by multiple IRBs as no need to attain retrospective informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arbor, S., Binstock, J., Panini, S. et al. Development and Validation of a Shared Secure Biochemistry Test Bank for Medical, Dental, and Pharmacy Schools. Med.Sci.Educ. 30, 403–415 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-00919-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-00919-y

Keywords

Navigation