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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18263910)

  • 1. A critical analysis of mini peer assessment tool (mini-PAT).
    Abdulla A
    J R Soc Med; 2008 Jan; 101(1):22-6. PubMed ID: 18263910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool): a well kept secret?
    Archer J
    J R Soc Med; 2008 Jun; 101(6):272. PubMed ID: 18515772
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool): a valid component of a national assessment programme in the UK?
    Archer J; Norcini J; Southgate L; Heard S; Davies H
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 May; 13(2):181-92. PubMed ID: 17036157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Framework for feedback: the peer mini-clinical examination as a formative assessment tool.
    Bennett D; Kelly M; O'Flynn S
    Med Educ; 2012 May; 46(5):512. PubMed ID: 22515770
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Peer-assessment of medical communication skills: the impact of students' personality, academic and social reputation on behavioural assessment.
    Hulsman RL; Peters JF; Fabriek M
    Patient Educ Couns; 2013 Sep; 92(3):346-54. PubMed ID: 23916674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Self-evaluation and peer-feedback of medical students' communication skills using a web-based video annotation system. Exploring content and specificity.
    Hulsman RL; van der Vloodt J
    Patient Educ Couns; 2015 Mar; 98(3):356-63. PubMed ID: 25433967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Critical features of peer assessment of clinical performance to enhance adherence to a low back pain guideline for physical therapists: a mixed methods design.
    Maas MJ; van Dulmen SA; Sagasser MH; Heerkens YF; van der Vleuten CP; Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW; van der Wees PJ
    BMC Med Educ; 2015 Nov; 15():203. PubMed ID: 26563246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance.
    Ramsey PG; Wenrich MD; Carline JD; Inui TS; Larson EB; LoGerfo JP
    JAMA; 1993 Apr; 269(13):1655-60. PubMed ID: 8240483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Early experiences of the mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool) amongst hospital pharmacists in south east London.
    Patel JP; West D; Bates IP; Eggleton AG; Davies G
    Int J Pharm Pract; 2009 Apr; 17(2):123-6. PubMed ID: 20214261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Factors that might undermine the validity of patient and multi-source feedback.
    Archer JC; McAvoy P
    Med Educ; 2011 Sep; 45(9):886-93. PubMed ID: 21848716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Improving the utility of multisource feedback for medical consultants in a tertiary hospital: a study of the psychometric properties of a survey tool.
    Corbett H; Pearson K; Karimi L; Lim WK
    Aust Health Rev; 2019 Jan; 43(6):717-723. PubMed ID: 30463660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Self-assessment by trainees using self-TAB as part of the team assessment of behaviour multisource feedback tool.
    Wall D; Singh D; Whitehouse A; Hassell A; Howes J
    Med Teach; 2012; 34(2):165-7. PubMed ID: 22288997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of rater selection on peer assessment among medical students.
    Lurie SJ; Nofziger AC; Meldrum S; Mooney C; Epstein RM
    Med Educ; 2006 Nov; 40(11):1088-97. PubMed ID: 17054618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [The "Medical Peer Review" curriculum of the German Medical Association].
    Chop I
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2012; 106(8):555-9. PubMed ID: 23084860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Variations in the ability of general medical practitioners to apply two methods of clinical audit: A five-year study of assessment by peer review.
    McKay J; Bowie P; Lough M
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2006 Dec; 12(6):622-9. PubMed ID: 17100861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Validation of a Spanish version of a 360° feedback tool for residents' performance: A pilot study.
    Parodi JB; de Lima AA; Burgos LM; Gelpi RJ
    Educ Health (Abingdon); 2020; 33(3):95-107. PubMed ID: 33727499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Workplace-based assessments of junior doctors: do scores predict training difficulties?
    Mitchell C; Bhat S; Herbert A; Baker P
    Med Educ; 2011 Dec; 45(12):1190-8. PubMed ID: 21995509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Implementation and evaluation of a peer review process for advanced practice nurses in a university hospital setting.
    Bergum SK; Canaan T; Delemos C; Gall EF; McCracken B; Rowen D; Salvemini S; Wiens K
    J Am Assoc Nurse Pract; 2017 Jul; 29(7):369-374. PubMed ID: 28560763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The learner as co-creator: A new peer review and self-assessment feedback form created by student nurses.
    Duers LE
    Nurse Educ Today; 2017 Nov; 58():47-52. PubMed ID: 28869881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peers as OSCE assessors for junior medical students - a review of routine use: a mixed methods study.
    Schwill S; Fahrbach-Veeser J; Moeltner A; Eicher C; Kurczyk S; Pfisterer D; Szecsenyi J; Loukanova S
    BMC Med Educ; 2020 Jan; 20(1):17. PubMed ID: 31948425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.