PubMed · 15231464
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Robert W Schafermeyer. 2004. Financing our future.. https://doi.org/10.1197/j.aem.2004.03.005
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: The maintenance of standards is a problem for postgraduate medical examinations, particularly if they use norm-referencing as the sole method of standard setting. In each of its diets, the MRCP(UK) Part 1 Examination includes a number of marker questions, which are unchanged from their use in a previous diet. This paper describes two complementary studies of marker questions for 52 diets of the MRCP(UK) Part 1 Examination over the years 1985 to 2001 to assess whether standards have changed. METHODS: Study 1, which used routinely collected information on the performance of 4405 marker items, used a statistical method to assess changes in performance across diets. Study 2 compared performances of individual candidates on 28 individual marker items that were shared by the 1996/2 and 2001/3 diets. RESULTS: Study 1 found evidence that candidate performance on the MRCP(UK) Part 1 Examination showed a gradual improvement over the period 1985 to 1997, which was followed by a sharp decline in performance until 2001. The 'dog-leg' in performance at 1997/3 was not an artefact of changed Examination Regulations, mix of UK and overseas candidates, or time from qualification until taking the Examination. Study 2 confirmed that performance in 2001/3 was significantly worse than in 1996/3, that the poorer performance was found in graduates of UK medical schools, and that candidates passing the Examination in 2001/3 performed less well than those passing in 1996/2. CONCLUSION: There has been a decline in the performance of graduates from UK medical schools taking the MRCP(UK) Part 1 examination. The reasons for this are not clear, but the finding has implications for medical education, and further studies are needed of performance in other postgraduate and undergraduate examinations. The use of norm-referencing as the sole method for setting the pass mark over this period meant that candidates passing the MRCP(UK) examination also had a lower standard. The MRCP(UK) Part 1 and Part 2 examinations now have their standard set by criterion-referencing.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Neonatal resuscitation is a common and important intervention, and adequate ventilation is the key to success. In the delivery room, positive pressure ventilation is given with manual ventilation devices using face masks. Mannequins are widely used to teach and practise this technique. During both simulated and real neonatal resuscitation, chest excursion is used to assess tidal volume delivery, and leakage from the mask is not measured. OBJECTIVE: To describe a system that allows measurement of mask leakage and estimation of tidal volume delivery. METHODS: Respiratory function monitors, a modified resuscitation mannequin, and a computer were used to measure leakage from the mask and to assess tidal volume delivery in a model of neonatal resuscitation. RESULTS: The volume of gas passing through a flow sensor was measured at the face mask. This was a good estimate of the tidal volume entering and leaving the lung in this model. Gas leakage between the mask and mannequin was also measured. This occurred principally during inflation, although gas leakage during deflation was seen when the total leakage was large. A volume of gas that distended the mask but did not enter the lung was also measured. CONCLUSION: This system can be used to assess the effectiveness of positive pressure ventilation given using a face mask during simulated neonatal resuscitation. It could be useful for teaching neonatal resuscitation and assessing ventilation through a face mask.