Parshall, C. G., Kromrey, J. D., & Hogarty, K. Y.. (2000). Sufficient simplicity or comprehensive complexity? A comparison of probabilitic and stratification methods of exposure control. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Parshall, C. G. (1998). Item development and pretesting in a computer-based testing environment. In Paper presented at the Educational Testing Service Sponsored Colloquium on Computer-Based Testing: Building the Foundation for Future Assessments. Philadelphia.

Parshall, C. G., Kromrey, J. D., Harmes, J. C., & Sentovich, C.. (2001). Nearest neighbors, simple strata, and probabilistic parameters: An empirical comparison of methods for item exposure control in CATs. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Seattle WA.

Parshall, C. G., Harmes, J. C., Davey, T., & Pashley, P. J.. (2010). Innovative Items for Computerized Testing. In Elements of Adaptive Testing (pp. 215-230). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85461-8

Parshall, C., Hogarty, K., & Kromrey, J.. (1999). Item exposure in adaptive tests: An empirical investigation of control strategies. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society. Lawrence KS.

Parker, S. B., & McBride, J. R.. (1990). A comparison of Rasch and three-parameter logistic models in computerized adaptive testing. Unpublished manuscript.

Park, J. (2007). A new delivery system for CAT. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.). Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Park, R., Kim, J., Chung, H., & Dodd, B. G.. (2017). The Development of MST Test Information for the Prediction of Test Performances. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 77, 570-586. doi:10.1177/0013164416662960

Park, R., Kim, J., Chung, H., & Dodd, B. G.. (2014). Enhancing Pool Utilization in Constructing the Multistage Test Using Mixed-Format Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 268-280. doi:10.1177/0146621613515545

Papanastasiou, E. C., & Reckase, M. D.. (2007). A “Rearrangement Procedure” For Scoring Adaptive Tests with Review Options. International Journal of Testing, 7, 387-407. doi:10.1080/15305050701632262

Papanastasiou, E. C. (2001). A rearrangement procedure for administering adaptive tests when review options are permitted. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Papanastasiou, E. C. (2002). A “rearrangement procedure” for administering adaptive tests with review options. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Panter, A. T., & Reeve, B. B.. (2002). Assessing tobacco beliefs among youth using item response theory models. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 68, S21-S39. presented at the Nov.

Paek, P. (2005). Recent trends in comparability studies (No. 05-05). PEM Research Report 05-05. presented at the August, 2005, Pearson.

Padaki, M., & Natarajan, V.. (2009). An approach to implementing adaptive testing using item response theory both offline and online. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2009 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Paap, M. C. S., Kroeze, K. A., Glas, C. A. W., Terwee, C. B., van der Palen, J., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2018). Measuring patient-reported outcomes adaptively: Multidimensionality matters!. Applied Psychological Measurement. doi:10.1177/0146621617733954

Paap, M. C. S., Born, S., & Braeken, J.. (In Press). Measurement efficiency for fixed-precision multidimensional computerized adaptive tests: Comparing health measurement and educational testing using example banks. Applied Psychological Measurement.

Paap, M. C. S., Born, S., & Braeken, J.. (2019). Measurement Efficiency for Fixed-Precision Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Tests: Comparing Health Measurement and Educational Testing Using Example Banks. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43, 68-83. doi:10.1177/0146621618765719

Paap, M. C. S., Kroeze, K. A., Terwee, C. B., van der Palen, J., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2017). Item usage in a multidimensional computerized adaptive test (MCAT) measuring health-related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 26, 2909–2918. doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1624-3