MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review is on some of the issues in standard setting based on the published articles of educational assessment researchers.
RESULTS: Standard or cut-off score should be to determine whether the examinee attained the requirement to be certified competent. There is no perfect method to determine cut score on a test and none is agreed upon as the best method. Setting standard is not an exact science. Legitimacy of the standard is supported when performance standard is linked to the requirement of practice. Test-curriculum alignment and content validity are important for most educational test validity arguments.
CONCLUSION: Representative percentage of must-know learning objectives in the curriculum may be the basis of test items and pass/fail marks. Practice analysis may help in identifying the must-know areas of curriculum. Cut score set by this procedure may give the credibility, validity, defensibility and comparability of the standard. Constructing the test items by subject experts and vetted by multi-disciplinary faculty members may ensure the reliability of the test as well as the standard.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A school-based cross-sectional study was performed from January to July 2006 by random selection on Standard 1 to Standard 6 students of 10 primary schools in the Kota Bharu district. Visual acuity assessment was measured using logMAR ETDRS chart. Positive predictive value of uncorrected visual acuity equal or worse than 20/40, was used as a cut-off point for further evaluation by automated refraction and retinoscopic refraction.
RESULTS: A total of 840 students were enumerated but only 705 were examined. The prevalence of uncorrected visual impairment was seen in 54 (7.7%) children. The main cause of the uncorrected visual impairment was refractive error which contributed to 90.7% of the total, and with 7.0% prevalence for the studied population. Myopia is the most common type of refractive error among children aged 6 to 12 years with prevalence of 5.4%, followed by hyperopia at 1.0% and astigmatism at 0.6%. A significant positive correlation was noted between myopia development with increasing age (P <0.005), more hours spent on reading books (P <0.005) and background history of siblings with glasses (P <0.005) and whose parents are of higher educational level (P <0.005). Malays in suburban Kelantan (5.4%) have the lowest prevalence of myopia compared with Malays in the metropolitan cities of Kuala Lumpur (9.2%) and Singapore (22.1%).
CONCLUSION: The ethnicity-specific prevalence rate of myopia was the lowest among Malays in Kota Bharu, followed by Kuala Lumpur, and is the highest among Singaporean Malays. Better socio-economic factors could have contributed to higher myopia rates in the cities, since the genetic background of these ethnic Malays are similar.
METHODS: This critique on the OSCE is based on the published findings of researchers from its inception in 1975 to 2004.
RESULTS: The reliability, validity, objectivity and practicability or feasibility of this examination are based on the number of stations, construction of stations, method of scoring (checklists and/ or global scoring) and number of students assessed. For a comprehensive assessment of clinical competence, other methods should be used in conjunction with the OSCE.
CONCLUSION: The OSCE can be a reasonably reliable, valid and objective method of assessment, but its main drawback is that it is resource-intensive.
METHOD: MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception until 9 February 2022 for studies that enrolled critically ill patients aged ≥60 years and investigated any area of nutrition therapy. No language or study design restrictions were applied.
RESULTS: Thirty-two studies (5 randomised controlled trials) with 6 topics were identified: (1) nutrition screening and assessments, (2) muscle mass assessment, (3) route or timing of nutrition therapy, (4) determination of energy and protein requirements, (5) energy and protein intake, and (6) pharmaconutrition. Topics (1), (3) and (6) had similar findings among general adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Skeletal muscle mass at ICU admission was significantly lower in older versus young patients. Among older ICU patients, low muscularity at ICU admission increased the risk of adverse outcomes. Predicted energy requirements using weight-based equations significantly deviated from indirect calorimetry measurements in older vs younger patients. Older ICU patients required higher protein intake (>1.5g/kg/day) than younger patients to achieve nitrogen balance. However, at similar protein intake, older patients had a higher risk of azotaemia.
CONCLUSION: Based on limited evidence, assessment of muscle mass, indirect calorimetry and careful monitoring of urea level may be important to guide nutrition therapy in older ICU patients. Other nutrition recommendations for general ICU patients may be used for older patients with sound clinical discretion.