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 *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17209890)

  • 1. Conditional reliability of admissions interview ratings: extreme ratings are the most informative.
    Stansfield RB; Kreiter CD
    Med Educ; 2007 Jan; 41(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 17209890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The admissions process of a bachelor of science in nursing program: initial reliability and validity of the personal interview.
    Carpio B; Brown B
    Can J Nurs Res; 1993; 25(3):41-52. PubMed ID: 8118768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of non-cognitive traits through the admissions multiple mini-interview.
    Lemay JF; Lockyer JM; Collin VT; Brownell AK
    Med Educ; 2007 Jun; 41(6):573-9. PubMed ID: 17518837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Predictive validity of the multiple mini-interview for selecting medical trainees.
    Eva KW; Reiter HI; Trinh K; Wasi P; Rosenfeld J; Norman GR
    Med Educ; 2009 Aug; 43(8):767-75. PubMed ID: 19659490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Global clinical performance rating, reliability and validity in an undergraduate clerkship.
    Daelmans HE; van der Hem-Stokroos HH; Hoogenboom RJ; Scherpbier AJ; Stehouwer CD; van der Vleuten CP
    Neth J Med; 2005; 63(7):279-84. PubMed ID: 16093582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Medical student selection: choice of a semi-structured panel interview or an unstructured one-on-one interview.
    Ann Courneya C; Wright K; Frinton V; Mak E; Schulzer M; Pachev G
    Med Teach; 2005 Sep; 27(6):499-503. PubMed ID: 16199355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The stability of maternal ratings of medical student interviews.
    O'Keefe M; Whitham J
    Med Educ; 2005 Sep; 39(9):966-9. PubMed ID: 16150038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Discerning quality: using the multiple mini-interview in student selection for the Australian National University Medical School.
    Harris S; Owen C
    Med Educ; 2007 Mar; 41(3):234-41. PubMed ID: 17316207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Factors affecting the utility of the multiple mini-interview in selecting candidates for graduate-entry medical school.
    Roberts C; Walton M; Rothnie I; Crossley J; Lyon P; Kumar K; Tiller D
    Med Educ; 2008 Apr; 42(4):396-404. PubMed ID: 18338992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. MOR: a simulation-based assessment centre for evaluating the personal and interpersonal qualities of medical school candidates.
    Ziv A; Rubin O; Moshinsky A; Gafni N; Kotler M; Dagan Y; Lichtenberg D; Mekori YA; Mittelman M
    Med Educ; 2008 Oct; 42(10):991-8. PubMed ID: 18823518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Medical school application interview score has limited predictive validity for performance on a fourth year clinical practice examination.
    Basco WT; Lancaster CJ; Gilbert GE; Carey ME; Blue AV
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 May; 13(2):151-62. PubMed ID: 17089077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Students versus faculty members as admissions interviewers: comparisons of ratings data and admissions decisions.
    Eddins-Folensbee FF; Harris TB; Miller-Wasik M; Thompson B
    Acad Med; 2012 Apr; 87(4):458-62. PubMed ID: 22361799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A predictive validity study of medical judgment vignettes to assess students' noncognitive attributes: a 3-year prospective longitudinal study.
    Donnon T; Oddone-Paolucci E; Violato C
    Med Teach; 2009 Apr; 31(4):e148-55. PubMed ID: 19241216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effectiveness of medical school admissions criteria in predicting residency ranking four years later.
    Peskun C; Detsky A; Shandling M
    Med Educ; 2007 Jan; 41(1):57-64. PubMed ID: 17209893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Multiple mini-interviews versus traditional interviews: stakeholder acceptability comparison.
    Razack S; Faremo S; Drolet F; Snell L; Wiseman J; Pickering J
    Med Educ; 2009 Oct; 43(10):993-1000. PubMed ID: 19769649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Modified personal interviews: resurrecting reliable personal interviews for admissions?
    Hanson MD; Kulasegaram KM; Woods NN; Fechtig L; Anderson G
    Acad Med; 2012 Oct; 87(10):1330-4. PubMed ID: 22914517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Medical school admissions: revisiting the veracity and independence of completion of an autobiographical screening tool.
    Hanson MD; Dore KL; Reiter HI; Eva KW
    Acad Med; 2007 Oct; 82(10 Suppl):S8-S11. PubMed ID: 17895698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reliability estimates: behavioural stations and questionnaires in medical school admissions.
    Gafni N; Moshinsky A; Eisenberg O; Zeigler D; Ziv A
    Med Educ; 2012 Mar; 46(3):277-88. PubMed ID: 22324527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Contribution of medical students to admission interviews.
    Koc T; Katona C; Rees PJ
    Med Educ; 2008 Mar; 42(3):315-21. PubMed ID: 18221267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Medical school admissions: enhancing the reliability and validity of an autobiographical screening tool.
    Dore KL; Hanson M; Reiter HI; Blanchard M; Deeth K; Eva KW
    Acad Med; 2006 Oct; 81(10 Suppl):S70-3. PubMed ID: 17001140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.