Do multiple true-false items beat the commonly used one-best-answers questions regarding to the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment? Results of a literature review

Background: Multiple True-False-Items (MTF-Items) might offer some advantages compared to one-best-answer-questions (TypeA) as they allow more than one correct answer and may better represent clinical decisions. However, in medical education assessment MTF-Items are seldom used. Summary of Work: With this literature review existing findings on MTF-items and on TypeA were compared along the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment, i.e. (1) reproducibility, (2) feasibility, (3) validity, (4) acceptance, (5) educational effect, (6) catalytic effects, and (7) equivalence. We conducted a literature research on ERIC and Google Scholar including papers from the years 1935 to 2014. We used the search terms “multiple true-false”, “true-false”, “true/false”, and “Kprim” combined with “exam”, “test”, and “assessment”. Summary of Results: We included 29 out of 33 studies. Four of them were carried out in the medical field Compared to TypeA, MTF-Items are associated with (1) higher reproducibility (2) lower feasibility (3) similar validity (4) higher acceptance (5) higher educational effect (6) no studies on catalytic effects or (7) equivalence. Discussion and Conclusions: While studies show overall good characteristics of MTF items according to the Ottawa criteria, this type of question seems to be rather seldom used. One reason might be the reported lower feasibility. Overall the literature base is still weak. Furthermore, only 14 % of literature is from the medical domain. Further studies to better understand the characteristics of MTF-Items in the medical domain are warranted. Take-home messages: Overall the literature base is weak and therefore further studies are needed. Existing studies show that: MTF-Items show higher reliability, acceptance and educational effect; MTF-Items are more difficult to produce

How to be in a good shape? The influence of clone morphology on cell competition

Cell competition is a conserved mechanism where slow proliferating cells (so called losers) are eliminated by faster proliferating neighbors (so called winners) through apoptosis.(1) It is an important process which prevents developmental malformations and maintains tissue fitness in aging adults.(2) Recently, we have shown that the probability of elimination of loser cells correlates with the surface of contact between losers and winners in Myc-induced competition.(3) Moreover, we have characterized an active mechanism that increases the surface of contact between losers and winners, hence accelerating the elimination of loser cells. This is the first indication that cell shape and mechanics can influence cell competition. Here, we will discuss the consequence of the relationship between shape and competition, as well as the relevance of this model for other modes of competition.

The Art of Enduring Contradictory Goals: Challenges in the Institutional Co‐construction of a ‘Good Death’

This paper focuses on the normative notion of ‘good death’, its practical relevance as a frame of reference for ‘death work’ procedures in institutional elder care in Switzerland and the ways in which it may be challenged within migrant ‘dying trajectories’. In contemporary palliative care, the concept of ‘good death’ focuses on the ideal of an autonomous dying person, cared for under a specialised biomedical authority. Transferred to the nursing home context, characterised by long-term basic care for the very old under conditions of scarce resources, the notion of ‘good death’ is broken down into ready-to-use, pragmatic elements of daily routines. At the same time, nursing homes are increasingly confronted with socially and culturally diversified populations. Based on ethnographic findings, we give insight into current practices of institutional ‘death work’ and tensions arising between contradicting notions of a ‘good death’, by referring to decision-making, life-prolonging measures, notions on food/feeding and the administration of sedative painkillers.