<?xml version="1.0"?>
<Articles JournalTitle="Acta Medica Iranica">
  <Article>
    <Journal>
      <PublisherName>Tehran University of Medical Sciences</PublisherName>
      <JournalTitle>Acta Medica Iranica</JournalTitle>
      <Issn>0044-6025</Issn>
      <Volume>62</Volume>
      <Issue>2</Issue>
      <PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
        <Year>2024</Year>
        <Month>11</Month>
        <Day>16</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </Journal>
    <title locale="en_US">Evaluating Inter-Rater Reliability: Transitioning to a Single Rater for Marking Modified Essay Questions in Undergraduate Medical Education</title>
    <FirstPage>88</FirstPage>
    <LastPage>95</LastPage>
    <AuthorList>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Shahid</FirstName>
        <LastName>Hassan</LastName>
        <affiliation locale="en_US">School of Medicine, American University of Barbados, Bridgetown, Barbados.</affiliation>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Malanashita</FirstName>
        <LastName>Ganeson</LastName>
        <affiliation locale="en_US">Department of Family Medicine, Kualalumpur, Malaysia.</affiliation>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName>Ismail Abdul Sattar</FirstName>
        <LastName>Burud</LastName>
        <affiliation locale="en_US">Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia</affiliation>
      </Author>
    </AuthorList>
    <History>
      <PubDate PubStatus="received">
        <Year>2024</Year>
        <Month>04</Month>
        <Day>21</Day>
      </PubDate>
      <PubDate PubStatus="accepted">
        <Year>2024</Year>
        <Month>08</Month>
        <Day>25</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </History>
    <abstract locale="en_US">Modified Essay Questions (MEQs) are often included in high-stakes examinations to assess higher-order cognitive skills. If the marking guides for MEQs are inadequate, this can lead to inconsistencies in marking. To ensure the reliability of MEQs as a subjective assessment tool, candidates&#x2019; responses are typically evaluated by two or more assessors. Previous studies have examined the impact of marker variance. Current study explores the possibility of assigning a single assessor to mark the students' performances in MEQ based on statistically drawn evidence in the clinical phase of the MBBS program at a private medical school in Malaysia. A robust evaluation method was employed to determine whether to continue with two raters or shift to a single-rater scheme for MEQs, using the Discrepancy-Agreement Grading (DAG) System for evaluation. A low standard deviation was observed across all 11 pairs of scores, with insignificant t-statistics (P&gt;0.05) in 2 pairs (18.18%) and significant t-statistics (P&lt;0.05) in 9 pairs (81.81%). The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) results were excellent, ranging from .815 to .997, all with P&lt;0.001. Regarding practical effect size (Cohen&#x2019;s d), 1 pair (9.09%) was categorized as having a strong effect size (&gt;0.8), 7 pairs (63.63%) as having a moderate effect size (0.5-&lt;0.8), and 3 pairs (27.27%) as having a weak effect size (0.2-&lt;0.5). The data analysis suggests that it is feasible to consider marking MEQ items by a single assessor without negatively impacting the reliability of the MEQ as an assessment tool.</abstract>
    <web_url>https://acta.tums.ac.ir/index.php/acta/article/view/11084</web_url>
    <pdf_url>https://acta.tums.ac.ir/index.php/acta/article/download/11084/5894</pdf_url>
  </Article>
</Articles>
