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 *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16729239)

  • 1. Standard setting in a small scale OSCE: a comparison of the Modified Borderline-Group Method and the Borderline Regression Method.
    Wood TJ; Humphrey-Murto SM; Norman GR
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2006 May; 11(2):115-22. PubMed ID: 16729239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Who will pass the dental OSCE? Comparison of the Angoff and the borderline regression standard setting methods.
    Schoonheim-Klein M; Muijtjens A; Habets L; Manogue M; van der Vleuten C; van der Velden U
    Eur J Dent Educ; 2009 Aug; 13(3):162-71. PubMed ID: 19630935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Standard setting for OSCEs: trial of borderline approach.
    Kilminster S; Roberts T
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2004; 9(3):201-9. PubMed ID: 15316271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37.
    Bandaranayake RC
    Med Teach; 2008; 30(9-10):836-45. PubMed ID: 19117221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Objective Borderline method (OBM): a probability-based model for setting up an objective pass/fail cut-off score in medical programme assessments.
    Shulruf B; Turner R; Poole P; Wilkinson T
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2013 May; 18(2):231-44. PubMed ID: 22484963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Estimating the minimum number of judges required for test-centred standard setting on written assessments. do discussion and iteration have an influence?
    Fowell SL; Fewtrell R; McLaughlin PJ
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 Mar; 13(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 16957872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ensuring global standards for medical graduates: a pilot study of international standard-setting.
    Stern DT; Ben-David MF; De Champlain A; Hodges B; Wojtczak A; Schwarz MR
    Med Teach; 2005 May; 27(3):207-13. PubMed ID: 16011943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How to set the bar in competency-based medical education: standard setting after an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE).
    Dwyer T; Wright S; Kulasegaram KM; Theodoropoulos J; Chahal J; Wasserstein D; Ringsted C; Hodges B; Ogilvie-Harris D
    BMC Med Educ; 2016 Jan; 16():1. PubMed ID: 26727954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Large-scale multi-site OSCEs for national competency examination of medical doctors in Indonesia.
    Rahayu GR; Suhoyo Y; Nurhidayah R; Hasdianda MA; Dewi SP; Chaniago Y; Wikaningrum R; Hariyanto T; Wonodirekso S; Achmad T
    Med Teach; 2016 Aug; 38(8):801-7. PubMed ID: 26380878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Standard setting: a comparison of case-author and modified borderline-group methods in a small-scale OSCE.
    Humphrey-Murto S; MacFadyen JC
    Acad Med; 2002 Jul; 77(7):729-32. PubMed ID: 12114151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. OSCE Standard Setting: Three Borderline Group Methods.
    Smee S; Coetzee K; Bartman I; Roy M; Monteiro S
    Med Sci Educ; 2022 Dec; 32(6):1439-1445. PubMed ID: 36532388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Standard Setting Methods for Pass/Fail Decisions on High-Stakes Objective Structured Clinical Examinations: A Validity Study.
    Yousuf N; Violato C; Zuberi RW
    Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(3):280-91. PubMed ID: 26158330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. A standard setting method with the best performing students as point of reference: practical and affordable.
    Cohen-Schotanus J; van der Vleuten CP
    Med Teach; 2010; 32(2):154-60. PubMed ID: 20163232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Estimation of decision consistency indices for complex assessments: model based approaches.
    Stearns M; Smith RM
    J Appl Meas; 2008; 9(3):305-15. PubMed ID: 18753697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A collaborative comparison of objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) standard setting methods at Australian medical schools.
    Malau-Aduli BS; Teague PA; D'Souza K; Heal C; Turner R; Garne DL; van der Vleuten C
    Med Teach; 2017 Dec; 39(12):1261-1267. PubMed ID: 28936900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Development of a modified Cohen method of standard setting.
    Taylor CA
    Med Teach; 2011; 33(12):e678-82. PubMed ID: 22225450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A resource efficient and reliable standard setting method for OSCEs: Borderline regression method using standardized patients as sole raters in clinical case encounters with medical students.
    Milan FB; Grochowalski JH
    Med Teach; 2022 Aug; 44(8):878-885. PubMed ID: 35234562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing the cut score for the borderline group method and borderline regression method with norm-referenced standard setting in an objective structured clinical examination in medical school in Korea.
    Park SY; Lee SH; Kim MJ; Ji KH; Ryu JH
    J Educ Eval Health Prof; 2021; 18():25. PubMed ID: 34565121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Description and impact of using a standard-setting method for determining pass/fail scores in a surgery clerkship.
    Schindler N; Corcoran J; DaRosa D
    Am J Surg; 2007 Feb; 193(2):252-7. PubMed ID: 17236857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.