Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube

Examining the Construct Stability of the Family Medicine Certification Scale Across Two Modes of Administration

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Thomas R. O’Neill, PhD; Keith Stelter, MD, MMM; Ting Wang, PhD

Corresponding Author: Thomas R. O’Neill, PhD; The American Board of Family Medicine

Email: toneill@theabfm.org

DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2023.230443R1

Keywords: Certification, Evaluation Study, Family Medicine, Licensing, Longitudinal Studies, Psychometrics, Research Design, Scales, Statistics

Dates: Submitted: 12-03-2023; Revised: 04-03-2024; Accepted: 04-08-2024

AHEAD OF PRINT: |HTML| |PDF|  FINAL PUBLICATION: |HTML| |PDF|


PURPOSE: To determine whether the construct of family medicine clinical decision-making ability was invariant across modes of administration, the one-day exam and the longitudinal assessment. We attempted to identify item characteristics associated with differences in difficulty across modes of administration.

METHODS: The data were item difficulty calibrations based on examinee responses to the one-day exam and the longitudinal assessment.  A repeated measures design was employed to identify question calibration differences across modes of administration, so that the stability of the question difficulty across modes of administration could be assessed. A qualitative review of the flagged questions was conducted to identify characteristics associated with questions becoming easier or more difficult.

RESULTS: The correlation between the pairs of calibrations was moderately positive r(298) = .558, p < .001 suggesting that the questions are functioning somewhat similarly across the different modes of administration; however, the scatterplot demonstrates that many of the questions became easier. Of the 298 repeated measures t-tests, 37% (110) did not show a significant difference, 43% (128) became easier on the longitudinal assessment, and 20% (60) became more difficult.

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that changes in item difficulty do occur when extra time and the use of external resources are permitted. Usually the questions get easier, but in some cases the question becomes more difficult. Possible reasons for this are presented, and a method to adjust the item difficulty in a way to maintain a single construct is presented.

ABSTRACTS IN PRESS

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire