These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12578272)

  • 1. Are undergraduate examinees' perceptions of item difficulty related to item characteristics?
    Morse DT; Morse LW
    Percept Mot Skills; 2002 Dec; 95(3 Pt 2):1281-6. PubMed ID: 12578272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Are faculty predictions or item taxonomies useful for estimating the outcome of multiple-choice examinations?
    Kibble JD; Johnson T
    Adv Physiol Educ; 2011 Dec; 35(4):396-401. PubMed ID: 22139777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effects of violating standard item writing principles on tests and students: the consequences of using flawed test items on achievement examinations in medical education.
    Downing SM
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2005; 10(2):133-43. PubMed ID: 16078098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Examining item difficulty and response time on perceptual ability test items.
    Yang CL; O'Neill TR; Kramer GA
    J Appl Meas; 2002; 3(3):282-99. PubMed ID: 12147914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The influence of agenda-based and habitual processes on item selection during study.
    Dunlosky J; Ariel R
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jul; 37(4):899-912. PubMed ID: 21480756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Statistical item analysis of the examination in anesthesiology for medical students using the Rasch model.
    Yang SC; Tsou MY; Chen ET; Chan KH; Chang KY
    J Chin Med Assoc; 2011 Mar; 74(3):125-9. PubMed ID: 21421207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Using automatic item generation to create multiple-choice test items.
    Gierl MJ; Lai H; Turner SR
    Med Educ; 2012 Aug; 46(8):757-65. PubMed ID: 22803753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact of item-writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievement in high-stakes nursing assessments.
    Tarrant M; Ware J
    Med Educ; 2008 Feb; 42(2):198-206. PubMed ID: 18230093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The Impact of Repeated Exposure to Items.
    O'Neill TR; Sun L; Peabody MR; Royal KD
    Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(4):404-9. PubMed ID: 26507998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Multiple choice questions can be designed or revised to challenge learners' critical thinking.
    Tractenberg RE; Gushta MM; Mulroney SE; Weissinger PA
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2013 Dec; 18(5):945-61. PubMed ID: 23288470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Item analysis for the written test of Taiwanese board certification examination in anaesthesiology using the Rasch model.
    Chang KY; Tsou MY; Chan KH; Chang SH; Tai JJ; Chen HH
    Br J Anaesth; 2010 Jun; 104(6):717-22. PubMed ID: 20427368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [A neuro-psychological test (T-K-W test) for dementia based on working memory theory and item-response theory: its development and construction].
    Namiki H; Shinohara Y; Yamamoto M; Yonekura Y
    Seishin Shinkeigaku Zasshi; 2002; 104(8):690-709. PubMed ID: 12451719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Retention of basic science information by senior medical students.
    Ling Y; Swanson DB; Holtzman K; Bucak SD
    Acad Med; 2008 Oct; 83(10 Suppl):S82-5. PubMed ID: 18820508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Do Students Effectively Regulate Their Use of Self-Testing as a Function of Item Difficulty?
    Badali S; Rawson KA; Dunlosky J
    Educ Psychol Rev; 2022; 34(3):1651-1677. PubMed ID: 35283609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The relationship between classical item characteristics and item response time on computer-based testing.
    Chae YM; Park SG; Park I
    Korean J Med Educ; 2019 Mar; 31(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 30852856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. It takes only 100 true-false items to test medical students: true or false?
    Pamphlett R
    Med Teach; 2005 Aug; 27(5):468-72. PubMed ID: 16147803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Is an Angoff standard an indication of minimal competence of examinees or of judges?
    Verheggen MM; Muijtjens AM; Van Os J; Schuwirth LW
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 May; 13(2):203-11. PubMed ID: 17043915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A modified electronic key feature examination for undergraduate medical students: validation threats and opportunities.
    Fischer MR; Kopp V; Holzer M; Ruderich F; Jünger J
    Med Teach; 2005 Aug; 27(5):450-5. PubMed ID: 16147800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Computer-adaptive testing: the impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions.
    Tonidandel S; Quiñones MA; Adams AA
    J Appl Psychol; 2002 Apr; 87(2):320-32. PubMed ID: 12002960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Item response analysis on an examination in anesthesiology for medical students in Taiwan: a comparison of one- and two-parameter logistic models.
    Huang YF; Tsou MY; Chen ET; Chan KH; Chang KY
    J Chin Med Assoc; 2013 Jun; 76(6):344-9. PubMed ID: 23602214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.