The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Early validity and reliability evidence for the American Board of Emergency Medicine Virtual Oral Examination
Open accessAbstract
Background: The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) in‐person Oral Certification Examination (OCE) was halted abruptly in 2020 due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The OCE was reconfigured to be administered in a virtual environment starting in December 2020. Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether there was sufficient validity and reliability evidence to support the continued use of the ABEM virtual Oral Examination (VOE) for certification decisions. Methods: This retrospective, descriptive study used multiple data sources to provide validity evidence and reliability data. Validity evidence focused on test content, response processes, internal structure (e.g., internal consistency and item response theory), and the consequences of testing. A multifaceted Rasch reliability coefficient was used to measure reliability. Study data were from two 2019 in‐person OCEs and the first four VOE administrations. Results: There were 2279 physicians who took the 2019 in‐person OCE examination and 2153 physicians who took the VOE during the study period. Among the OCE group, 92.0% agreed or strongly agreed that the cases on the examination were cases that an emergency physician should be expected to see; 91.1% of the VOE group agreed or strongly agreed. A similar pattern of responses given to a question about whether the cases on the examination were cases that they had seen. Additional evidence of validity was obtained by the use of the EM Model, the process for case development, the use of think‐aloud protocols, and similar test performance patterns (e.g., pass rates). For reliability, the Rasch reliability coefficients for the OCE and the VOE during the study period were all >0.90. Conclusions: There was substantial validity evidence and reliability to support ongoing use of the ABEM VOE to make confident and defensible certification decisions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 11
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- Carmines EG, 1979, Reliability and validity assessment. Sage University Paper Series on Qualitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07–017
- American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and the National Council on measurement in education, 2014, Standards for Education and Psychological Testing, 13
- Bandalos DL, 2018, Measurement Theory and Applications for Social Sciences, 267
- 10.1067/mem.2003.214 · DOI
- 10.1111/acem.13068 · DOI
- Maatsch JL, 1982, Emergency Medicine Annual: Nineteen Eighty‐Two, 183
- Reinhart MA, 1995, Assessing Clinical Reasoning: the Oral Examination and Alternative Methods, 31
- 10.1097/00001888-199009000-00036 · DOI
- Wolfe EW, 2007, Best Practices in Quantitative Methods, 71
- 10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jemermed.2020.03.018 · DOI
- Messick S, 1989, Educational Measurement, 13
- 10.1111/medu.12678 · DOI
- 10.4300/JGME-D-21-00067.1 · DOI
- 10.1002/aet2.10462 · DOI
- 10.1197/aemj.9.11.1249 · DOI
- 10.1111/acem.13137 · DOI
- Bandalos DL, 2018, Measurement Theory and Applications for Social Sciences, 529
Metadata
- Authors
- Chudnofsky, C. R., Reisdorff, E. J., Joldersma, K. B., Ruff, K. C., Goyal, D. G., & Gorgas, D. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- American Board of Emergency Medicine (US)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Reisdorff, Earl J.
- Venue
- AEM Education and Training
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-03-26
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- e10850-e10850
- ISSN
- 2472-5390 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10041069
- OpenAlex
- W4361010265
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4
- FWCI
- 2.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- AEM Education and Training (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency Medicine Education and Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- American Board of Emergency Medicine, emergency medicine board certification, test validity, test reliability, item response theory, internal consistency, COVID-19 pandemic, think-aloud, case development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review