An item bank is key to applying computerized adaptive testing (CAT). The traditional approach to developing an item bank requires content experts to design each item individually, which is a time-consuming and costly process. The cognitive design system (CDS) approach offers a solution by automating item generation. However, the CDS approach has a specific way of calibrating or predicting item difficulty that affects the measurement efficiency of CAT. A simulation study was conducted to compare the efficiency of CAT using both calibration and prediction models. The results show that, although the predictive model (linear logistic trait model; LLTM) shows a higher root mean square error (RMSE) than the baseline model (Rasch), it requires only a few additional items to achieve comparable RMSE. Importantly, the number of additional items needed decreases as the explanatory rate of the model increases. These results indicate that the slight reduction in measurement efficiency due to prediction item difficulty is acceptable. Moreover, the use of prediction item difficulty can significantly reduce or even eliminate the need for item pretesting, thereby reducing the costs associated with item calibration.

Creating original, integrated multiple-choice questions (MCQs) is time-consuming and onerous for basic science and clinical faculty. We demonstrate that medical students are co-experts to overcome assessment challenges of the faculty. We recruited, trained, and motivated medical students to write 10,000 high-quality MCQs for use in the foundational courses of medical education. These students were ideal because they possessed integrated knowledge (basic sciences and clinical experience). We taught them how to write high-quality MCQs using a writing template and continuous monitoring and support by an item bank curator. The students themselves also benefitted personally and pedagogically from the experience.

Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) is a widely embraced approach for delivering personalized educational assessments, tailoring each test to the real-time performance of individual examinees. Despite its potential advantages, CAT�s application in small-scale assessments has been limited due to the complexities associated with calibrating the item bank using sparse response data and small sample sizes. This study addresses these challenges by developing a two-step item bank calibration strategy that leverages the 1-bit matrix completion method in conjunction with two distinct incomplete pretesting designs. We introduce two novel 1-bit matrix completion-based imputation methods specifically designed to tackle the issues associated with item calibration in the presence of sparse response data and limited sample sizes. To demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches, we conduct a comparative assessment against several established item parameter estimation methods capable of handling missing data. This evaluation is carried out through two sets of simulation studies, each featuring different pretesting designs, item bank structures, and sample sizes. Furthermore, we illustrate the practical application of the methods investigated, using empirical data collected from small-scale assessments.

OBJECTIVE: To generate a bank of items describing application and interpretation errors that can arise in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were searched to identify studies describing types of errors in meta-analyses. Descriptions of errors and supporting quotes were extracted by multiple authors. Errors were reviewed at team meetings to determine if they should be excluded, reworded, or combined with other errors, and were categorized into broad categories of errors and subcategories within.
RESULTS: Fifty articles met our inclusion criteria, leading to the identification of 139 errors. We identified 25 errors covering data extraction/manipulation, 74 covering statistical analyses, and 40 covering interpretation. Many of the statistical analysis errors related to the meta-analysis model (eg, using a two-stage strategy to determine whether to select a fixed or random-effects model) and statistical heterogeneity (eg, not undertaking an assessment for statistical heterogeneity).
CONCLUSIONS: We generated a comprehensive bank of possible errors that can arise in the application and interpretation of meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions. This item bank of errors provides the foundation for developing a checklist to help peer reviewers detect statistical errors.

BACKGROUND: Presbyopia is an age-related condition that causes a decreased ability to focus on nearby objects. Multifocal contact lenses are commonly used to address this issue. However, there seems to be a notable dissatisfaction among multifocal contact lens wearers. The absence of a reliable instrument to measure the patient\'s perspective, despite the widespread use of this method, highlights the need for further research in this area.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to develop an item-bank integrating all domains necessary to assess the patient\'s perspective on multifocal contact lens performance, offering a comprehensive measure. The item-bank will ensure a high level of content validity, be self-administered, and will initially be available in Spanish. The aim of this tool is to serve as a valuable resource for research and optometric clinics, facilitating the follow-up of patients with presbyopia who wear multifocal contact lenses or those who are newly starting to use them.
METHODS: The MCL-PRO item bank, followed a systematic and step-wise inductive approach to gather information, following the recommendations outlined in the COSMIN guidelines and similar studies. The process involved the following steps: (1) Literature review and relevant existing items identification (2) Social media review, (3) Semi-structured focus groups, (4) performing qualitative analysis, (5) refining and revising the items, and (6) generating the content of the item bank.
RESULTS: A total of 575 items were included in the item-bank hosted under 8 different domains that were found to be important for presbyopic population: visual symptoms (213), activity limitation (111), ocular symptoms (135), convenience (36), emotional well-being (33), general symptoms (16), cognitive issues (21) and economic issues (10).
CONCLUSIONS: The item-bank created has followed standardised methodology for its development and encloses all the aspects for MCL performance evaluation from patients perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Computerised adaptive test (CAT) provides individualised patient reported outcome measurement while retaining direct comparability of scores across patients and studies. Optimal CAT measurement requires an appropriate CAT-setting, the set of criteria defining the CAT including start item, item selection criterion, and stop criterion. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CAT Core allows for assessing the 14 functional and symptom domains covered by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire. The aim was to present a general approach for selecting CAT-settings and to use this to develop a portfolio of standard settings for the EORTC CAT Core optimised for different purposes and populations.
METHODS: Using simulations, the measurement properties of CATs of different length and precision were evaluated and compared allowing for identifying the most suitable settings. All CATs were initiated with the most informative QLQ-C30 item. For each domain two fixed-length and two fixed-precision standard CATs were selected focusing on efficiency (brief version) and precision (long), respectively.
RESULTS: The brief fixed-length CATs included 3-5 items each while the long versions included 5-8 items. The fixed-precision CATs aimed for reliability of 0.65-0.95 (brief versions) and 0.85-0.98 (long versions), respectively. Median sample size savings using the CATs compared to the QLQ-C30 scales ranged 20%-31%, although savings varied considerably across the domains.
CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC CAT Core standard settings simplify selection of relevant and appropriate CATs. The CATs prioritise either brevity and efficiency or precision, but all provide increased measurement precision and hence, reduced sample size requirements compared to the QLQ-C30 scales. The CATs may be used as they are or modified to accommodate specific requirements.

OBJECTIVE: Since the implementation of value-based healthcare, there has been a growing emphasis on utilizing patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) to enhance the quality of care. However, the current PREMs are primarily generic and static, whereas healthcare is constantly evolving and encompasses a wide variety of aspects that impact care quality. To continuously improve care requires a dynamic PREM. The aim of this study was to propose an item bank for the establishment of a dynamic and care-specific patient-reported evaluation.
METHODS: In co-creation with patients, a mixed methods study was conducted involving: (1) an explorative review of the literature, (2) a focus group analysis with (ex-)patients, (3) qualitative analyses to formulate themes, and (4) a quantitative selection of items by patients and experts through prioritization.
RESULTS: Eight existing PREMs were evaluated. After removing duplicates, 141 items were identified. Through qualitative analyses of the focus group in which the patient journey was discussed, eight themes were formulated: \"Organization of healthcare,\" \"Competence of healthcare professionals,\" \"Communication,\" \"Information & services,\" \"Patient empowerment,\" \"Continuity & informal care,\" \"Environment,\" and \"Technology.\" Seven patients and eleven professionals were asked to prioritize what they considered the most important items. From this, an item bank with 76 items was proposed.
CONCLUSIONS: In collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals, we have proposed a PREM-item bank to evaluate the experiences of patients\' receiving cancer care in an outpatient clinic. This item bank is the first step to dynamically assess the quality of cancer care provided in an outpatient setting.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Cancer-Anxiety item bank using a graded response model in a sample of patients with cancer.
UNASSIGNED: A cross-sectional study was conducted and the Chinese version of the PROMIS-Cancer-Anxiety item bank was used to measure anxiety in patients with cancer. The unidimensional structure of the item bank was evaluated using principal component analysis. Residual correlations and the graphs of item mean scores conditional on the rest scores were examined to evaluate the local independence and monotonicity of the items, respectively. Item characteristics were described using item parameter estimates and item information. Operating characteristic curves (OCCs) and test information curve (TIC) were also plotted. Measurement invariance across age, gender, and education level was assessed to identify possible differential item functioning (DIF).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 1075 patients with cancer were enrolled. Under the assumptions of unidimensionality, local independence, and monotonicity, the discrimination parameters a ranged from 2.30 to 5.47, and the threshold parameters b ranged from b1 = -2.87 to b4 = 3.21 with proper intervals. Completely overlapped category curves were not observed among the OCCs of any items. Item information and TIC showed that the item bank had a wide measurement range. The DIFs for age, gender, and education level for all items were not remarkable.
UNASSIGNED: The results supported using the Chinese version of the PROMIS-Cancer-Anxiety item bank to measure anxiety and develop a computerized adaptive testing (CAT) system for anxiety in patients with cancer.

UNASSIGNED: Understanding the quality-of-life (QoL) impacts of amblyopia and strabismus from the perspectives of patients using validated tools would enable eye care practitioners to provide better clinical management.
UNASSIGNED: Item banks are advanced patient reported outcome measures with several advantages over traditional QoL assessment. This paper describes the development of amblyopia and strabismus-specific QoL item banks for two distinct country settings: Australia (high-income) and India (low-middle income) and examines the unique QoL issues.
UNASSIGNED: Using a bottom-up systematic approach, the content for the item banks was identified from three sources: existing self-report amblyopia and strabismus questionnaires (n = 22), qualitative literature (n = 5) and prospective qualitative studies in Australia (n = 49) and India (n = 30). The initial item pool underwent item evaluation, construction, and pre-testing to form optimal sets of representative items. The Indian item pools were first developed in English and translated into Hindi and Tamil using a rigorous translation protocol. The differences in QoL experiences that emanated from the qualitative studies and the number of common and unique items in the final item pools were compared.
UNASSIGNED: The final Australian and Indian item pools comprised 312 and 277 items, respectively, covering 11 QoL domains. Two hundred and sixty items (79%) were common to both countries, and 21% were unique. Of the 11 domains, except for activity limitation (64.5%), visual symptoms (73.3%) and emotional impact (75.5%) domains, all other domains had over 80% of items common to both countries. The unique items can be attributed to differences in QoL experiences, individual perspectives, culture, lifestyle, country setting and health systems.
UNASSIGNED: Amblyopia has a multifaceted impact on QoL irrespective of the country settings. Despite a huge overlap in QoL impacts between Australia and India, both countries had unique issues, especially activity limitations. The study developed comprehensive, country-specific item pools for Australia and India.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients may experience a decrease in cognitive functioning before, during and after cancer treatment. So far, the Quality of Life Group of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC QLG) developed an item bank to assess self-reported memory and attention within a single, cognitive functioning scale (CF) using computerized adaptive testing (EORTC CAT Core CF item bank). However, the distinction between different cognitive functions might be important to assess the patients\' functional status appropriately and to determine treatment impact. To allow for such assessment, the aim of this study was to develop and psychometrically evaluate separate item banks for memory and attention based on the EORTC CAT Core CF item bank.
METHODS: In a multistep process including an expert-based content analysis, we assigned 44 items from the EORTC CAT Core CF item bank to the memory or attention domain. Then, we conducted psychometric analyses based on a sample used within the development of the EORTC CAT Core CF item bank. The sample consisted of 1030 cancer patients from Denmark, France, Poland, and the United Kingdom. We evaluated measurement properties of the newly developed item banks using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory model calibration.
RESULTS: Item assignment resulted in 31 memory and 13 attention items. Conducted CFAs suggested good fit to a 1-factor model for each domain and no violations of monotonicity or indications of differential item functioning. Evaluation of CATs for both memory and attention confirmed well-functioning item banks with increased power/reduced sample size requirements (for CATs ≥ 4 items and up to 40% reduction in sample size requirements in comparison to non-CAT format).
CONCLUSIONS: Two well-functioning and psychometrically robust item banks for memory and attention were formed from the existing EORTC CAT Core CF item bank. These findings could support further research on self-reported cognitive functioning in cancer patients in clinical trials as well as for real-word-evidence. A more precise assessment of attention and memory deficits in cancer patients will strengthen the evidence on the effects of cancer treatment for different cancer entities, and therefore contribute to shared and informed clinical decision-making.