Protocol: how the pool of sources was built

Every search, count and rule of the practice-questions review; all searches ran on 2026-10-29, one reviewer. Terms are defined in frame; shared rules in the evidence README.

1. Why grey literature

Garousi 2019, Table 4, answered for practice-questions: all seven questions get a yes.

# Question Answer for this review
1 Complex, not solvable from formal literature alone? yes: item-writing rules come from textbooks and testing bodies, not from studies (Haladyna 1989)
2 Lack of volume or quality of evidence? yes: no study compares where answers sit in a study text
3 Context important? yes: classroom and lab results on format disagree (Yang 2021; Rowland 2014)
4 Corroborate research with practice? yes
5 Challenge practice with research, or the reverse? yes: textbook questions stay at low levels (Momsen 2010)
6 Would a synthesis serve both communities? yes
7 Large practitioner volume? yes: 12,654,431,762 quiz questions on registered Moodle sites (Moodle 2026)

2. Questions

Q1 to Q7, as in frame: kinds and levels; format; item writing; feedback; where answers sit; practice; generated questions.

3. Existing reviews (Garousi Guideline 2)

  • Searched first, by strings F13 (feedback meta-analyses), F18b (transfer meta-analyses), F7 (item-writing guidelines), F15 (AQG reviews) and F23 (distractor reviews).
  • Found: 20 new reviews and meta-analyses, plus the core's Rowland 2014 and Yang 2021, whose moderator sections were read in full. New ones read in full: Pan 2018, Wisniewski 2020, Hattie 2007. By abstract: 16. Through a news release: Butler 2018.
  • Located, not used: a survey of AQG and answer assessment (ERIC EJ1288621; 2021) and a meta-analysis of retrieval against elaborative encoding (ERIC EJ1492680; 2025). Also: a 1985 review of adjunct questions and objectives (reviewed in the instructional-text review).
  • They are placed in review.md strand 0.

6. Stopping rule

  • Stated before the first search (2026-10-29): effort bounded, the 20 most relevant ERIC records and the 20 most cited Semantic Scholar records per string. Saturation at 5 strings in a row that add no new included source.
  • Formal: saturation was not reached; the run ended when every sub-question had been searched in three forms. The last two strings, F29 and F30, added 1 and 0. Fewer than 20 Semantic Scholar titles were printed per string (8 to 12), a departure from the stated N.
  • Grey web: first result page per string.
  • Q/A: the shared rule, top 30 per string and site; saturation inside a string never cut a list short.

7. Selection

  • Include: a source on how a question in study material is written, placed, answered or fed back. Also a source on what practice does, with an outcome on learning, on the item, or on adoption. The source is in English and readable on the day at least by abstract or, for a guide, by its page.
  • Exclude:
    • studies that only re-measure the testing effect, held in the core (learning-science);
    • assessment design with no bearing on questions as learning (equating, scoring rules, adaptive testing), including most answer-until-correct scoring studies of F14;
    • question generation for machine reading benchmarks, with no learner (most of X1 to X3);
    • live classroom questioning and clickers (presentations review);
    • works of another topic, passed to handoff.md.

8. Quality of grey sources (Garousi Guideline 11, Table 7)

  • Outlet tier: books, standards, government guides = tier 1 (1); project documentation, teaching-centre pages, news releases, Q/A threads = tier 2 (0.5); blogs = tier 3 (0).
  • The NBME guide, read only by its landing page, scores low on the parts not seen.
  • Scores, with subtotals, are in sources.md.

9. Extraction and synthesis

  • Extracted per source: kind, year, the claim, the evidence offered, any number (marked "(secondary)" if not read in the primary), and which question it answers.

10. Limits

  • One reviewer, no inter-rater agreement; no second rater has scored the grey sources yet.
  • Search engines personalise and change; counts will differ on a repeat. Semantic Scholar refused five strings and is not phrase-exact.
  • Most formal sources were read by abstract only; sources.md says which. Publisher pages of APA, Elsevier, Taylor and Francis and SAGE were not readable without access, and a request that would have needed a changed client identity was not made.
  • No archived copy was made of the practice pages; Moodle, OpenStax and NBME pages may move.
  • This search found no study comparing answer placements in a study text; that is not proof none exists.