Schneider, R. J., Goff, M., Anderson, S., & Borman, W. C.. (2003). Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 237-246.

Hart, D. L., Mioduski, J. E., Werneke, M. W., & Stratford, P. W.. (2006). Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59, 947–956. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.017

Cheng, P. E., & Liou, M.. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing using the nearest-neighbors criterion. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 204-216.

Meijer, R. R. (2004). Using patterns of summed scores in paper-and-pencil tests and computer-adaptive tests to detect misfitting item score patterns. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 119-136.

Stark, S., & Drasgow, F.. (2002). An EM approach to parameter estimation for the Zinnes and Griggs paired comparison IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 208-227.

Levy, R., Behrens, J. T., & Mislevy, R. J.. (2023). An Extended Taxonomy of Variants of Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 10(1). doi:10.7333/2302-100101

Eggen, T., & Verschoor, A. J.. (2006). Optimal testing with easy or difficult items in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 379-393.

Ruscio, J., & Ruscio, A. M.. (2002). A structure-based approach to psychological measurement: Matching measurement models to latent structure. Assessment, 9, 4-16.

Magis, D., & Raîche, G.. (2011). catR: An R Package for Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement. doi:10.1177/0146621611407482

Miceli, R., & Molinengo, G.. (2005). Somministrazione di test computerizzati di tipo adattivo: Un' applicazione del modello di misurazione di Rasch [Administration of computerized and adaptive tests: An application of the Rasch Model]. Testing Psicometria Metodologia, 12, 131-149.

Lei, P. - W., Chen, S. - Y., & Yu, L.. (2006). Comparing methods of assessing differential item functioning in a computerized adaptive testing environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 245-264.

Finkelman, M., & Wang, C.. (2019). Time-Efficient Adaptive Measurement of Change. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 7(2), 15-34. doi:10.7333/1909-0702015

Passos, V. L., Berger, M. P. F., & Tan, F. E. S.. (2008). The D-optimality item selection criterion in the early stage of CAT: A study with the graded response model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 33, 88-110.

Han, S. - Y., & Yoo, Y. Joo. (2017). Efficiency of Item Selection in CD-CAT Based on Conjunctive Bayesian Network Modeling Hierarchical attributes. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1RbO2gd4aULqsSgRi_VZudNN_edX82NeD

Eggen, T., & Verschoor, A. J.. (2006). Optimal testing with easy or difficult items in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 379-393.

van Buuren, N., Straat, H., Eggen, T., & Fox, J. - P.. (2017). Adaptive Item and Feedback Selection in Personalized Learning with a Network Approach. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University.

van Groen, M., Eggen, T., & Veldkamp, B.. (2011). Item Selection Methods based on Multiple Objective Approaches for Classification of Respondents into Multiple Levels. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

Tang, K. L. (1996). A comparison of the traditional maximum information method and the global information method in CAT item selection. In annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New York, NY USA.

van Buuren, N., & Eggen, T. J. H. M.. (2017). Latent-Class-Based Item Selection for Computerized Adaptive Progress Tests. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 5(2), 22-43. doi:10.7333/1704-0502022

van der Linden, W. J. (2005). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 283-302.

Chen, S. - Y., & Ankenmann, R. D.. (2004). Effects of practical constraints on item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 149-174.

Chandra, I. (2017). Item Selection Strategies for Developing CAT in Indonesia. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata Japan: Niiagata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KuFrRATq9Q

Hai-qi, D., De-zhi, C., Shuliang, D., & Taiping, D.. (2006). The comparison among item selection strategies of CAT with multiple-choice items. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38, 778-783.

Ping, C., Shuliang, D., Haijing, L., & Jie, Z.. (2006). [Item Selection Strategies of Computerized Adaptive Testing based on Graded Response Model.]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38, 461-467.

Revuelta, J. (2004). Estimating ability and item-selection strategy in self-adapted testing: A latent class approach. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 379-396.

Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J.. (2007). Computerized adaptive testing for polytomous motivation items: Administration mode effects and a comparison with short forms. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 412-429.

Schneider, R. J., Goff, M., Anderson, S., & Borman, W. C.. (2003). Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 237-246.

Hart, D. L., Mioduski, J. E., & Stratford, P. W.. (2005). Simulated computerized adaptive tests for measuring functional status were efficient with good discriminant validity in patients with hip, knee, or foot/ankle impairments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 629-38.

Kingsbury, G., & Zara, T.. (2017). From Blueprints to Systems: An Integrated Approach to Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CBaAfH4ES7XivmvrMjPeKyFCsFZOpQMJ

Hart, D. L., Mioduski, J. E., & Stratford, P. W.. (2005). Simulated computerized adaptive tests for measuring functional status were efficient with good discriminant validity in patients with hip, knee, or foot/ankle impairments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 629-38.

Levy, R., Behrens, J. T., & Mislevy, R. J.. (2023). An Extended Taxonomy of Variants of Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 10(1). doi:10.7333/2302-100101

Belov, D. I. (2014). Detecting Item Preknowledge in Computerized Adaptive Testing Using Information Theory and Combinatorial Optimization. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 2(3), 37-58. doi:10.7333/1410-0203037

van Buuren, N., & Eggen, T. J. H. M.. (2017). Latent-Class-Based Item Selection for Computerized Adaptive Progress Tests. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 5(2), 22-43. doi:10.7333/1704-0502022

Finkelman, M. D., Weiss, D. J., & Kim-Kang, G.. (2010). Item Selection and Hypothesis Testing for the Adaptive Measurement of Change. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34(4), 238-254. doi:10.1177/0146621609344844

Mulcahey, M. J., Haley, S. M., Duffy, T., Pengsheng, N., & Betz, R. R.. (2008). Measuring physical functioning in children with spinal impairments with computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics, 28, 330-5. presented at the Apr-May.

Schwartz, C., Welch, G., Santiago-Kelley, P., Bode, R., & Sun, X.. (2006). Computerized adaptive testing of diabetes impact: a feasibility study of Hispanics and non-Hispanics in an active clinic population. Quality of Life Research, 15, 1503-18. presented at the Nov.

Cella, D., Chang, C. - H., Lai, J. S., & Webster, K.. (2002). Advances in quality of life measurements in oncology patients. Seminars in Oncology, 29, 60-8. presented at the Jun.

Abad, F. J., Olea, J., Aguado, D., Ponsoda, V., & Barrada, J. R.. (2010). Deterioro de parámetros de los ítems en tests adaptativos informatizados: estudio con eCAT [Item parameter drift in computerized adaptive testing: Study with eCAT]. Psicothema, 22, 340-7.

Yuyu, L., Chenglin, Z., & Jie, R.. (2017). MHK-MST Design and the Related Simulation Study. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University.

Imai, S. (2017). Is CAT Suitable for Automated Speaking Test?. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University.

De Champlain, A. F. (2017). Using Automated Item Generation in a Large-scale Medical Licensure Exam Program: Lessons Learned. In 2017 IACAT Conference. presented at the 08.2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=14N8hUc8qexAy5W_94TykEDABGVIJHG1h

Bulut, O., & Cormier, D.. (2017). A Large-Scale Progress Monitoring Application with Computerized Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uGbCKenRLnqTxImX1fZicR2c7GRV6Udc

van Buuren, N., & Eggen, T. J. H. M.. (2017). Latent-Class-Based Item Selection for Computerized Adaptive Progress Tests. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 5(2), 22-43. doi:10.7333/1704-0502022

Armstrong, R. D., Jones, D. H., Koppel, N. B., & Pashley, P. J.. (2004). Computerized adaptive testing with multiple-form structures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 147-164.

Gershon, R. C. (2005). Computer adaptive testing. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6, 109-27.

Jones-Dickson, C., Dorsey, D., Campbell-Warnock, J., & Fields, F.. (1993). Moving in a new direction: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT). Nursing Management, 24, 80, 82. presented at the Jan.

Newton, D. W., Boyle, M., & Catizone, C. A.. (2008). The NAPLEX: evolution, purpose, scope, and educational implications. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72, 33. presented at the Apr 15.

Barrada, J. R., Mazuela, P., & Olea, J.. (2006). Maximum information stratification method for controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing. Psicothema, 18, 156-159. presented at the Feb.

Kreiter, C. D., Ferguson, K., & Gruppen, L. D.. (1999). Evaluating the usefulness of computerized adaptive testing for medical in-course assessment. Academic Medicine, 74, 1125-8. presented at the Oct.

Finkelman, M. D., Weiss, D. J., & Kim-Kang, G.. (2010). Item Selection and Hypothesis Testing for the Adaptive Measurement of Change. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34(4), 238-254. doi:10.1177/0146621609344844

Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J.. (2008). Computerized Adaptive Testing of Personality Traits. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 216(1), 12-21. doi:10.1027/0044-3409.216.1.12

Gardner, W., Kelleher, K. J., & Pajer, K. A.. (2002). Multidimensional adaptive testing for mental health problems in primary care. Medical Care, 40, 812-23. presented at the Sep.

Morin, M. (2017). Adapting Linear Models for Optimal Test Design to More Complex Test Specifications. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University.

Edmonds, J., & Armstrong, R. D.. (2009). A mixed integer programming model for multiple stage adaptive testing. European Journal of Operational Research, 193, 342-350.

van der Linden, W. J., Ariel, A., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2006). Assembling a computerized adaptive testing item pool as a set of linear tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 81-99.

Balajthy, E. (2002). Information technology and literacy assessment. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 18, 369-373.

van der Linden, W. J. (2006). Equating scores from adaptive to linear tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 493-508.

van Buuren, N., & Eggen, T. J. H. M.. (2017). Latent-Class-Based Item Selection for Computerized Adaptive Progress Tests. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 5(2), 22-43. doi:10.7333/1704-0502022

Holman, R., Lindeboom, R., Vermeulen, M., & de Haan, R. J.. (2004). The AMC Linear Disability Score project in a population requiring residential care: psychometric properties. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. presented at the Aug 3.

Lei, P. - W., Chen, S. - Y., & Yu, L.. (2006). Comparing methods of assessing differential item functioning in a computerized adaptive testing environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 245-264.