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 *

247 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19239594)

  • 1. External feedback in general practice: a focus group study of trained peer reviewers of significant event analyses.
    McKay J; Pope L; Bowie P; Lough M
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2009 Feb; 15(1):142-7. PubMed ID: 19239594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Acceptability and educational impact of a peer feedback model for significant event analysis.
    McKay J; Shepherd A; Bowie P; Lough M
    Med Educ; 2008 Dec; 42(12):1210-7. PubMed ID: 19120952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Safer pharmacy practice: a preliminary study of significant event analysis and peer feedback.
    Bradley NA; Power A; Hesselgreaves H; McMillan F; Bowie P
    Int J Pharm Pract; 2009 Oct; 17(5):283-91. PubMed ID: 20214270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The peer review pilot project: a potential system to support GP appraisal in NHS Scotland?
    Murie J; McCrae J; Bowie P
    Educ Prim Care; 2009 Jan; 20(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 19618650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A qualitative study of why general practitioners may participate in significant event analysis and educational peer assessment.
    Bowie P; McKay J; Dalgetty E; Lough M
    Qual Saf Health Care; 2005 Jun; 14(3):185-9. PubMed ID: 15933315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. GP experiences of partner and external peer appraisal: a qualitative study.
    McKinstry B; Peacock H; Shaw J
    Br J Gen Pract; 2005 Jul; 55(516):539-43. PubMed ID: 16004740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The assessment of criterion audit cycles by external peer review - when is an audit not an audit?
    Bowie P; Cooke S; Lo P; McKay J; Lough M
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2007 Jun; 13(3):352-7. PubMed ID: 17518798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Barriers and attitudes influencing non-engagement in a peer feedback model to inform evidence for GP appraisal.
    Curnock E; Bowie P; Pope L; McKay J
    BMC Med Educ; 2012 Mar; 12():15. PubMed ID: 22443714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Appraisal of family doctors: an evaluation study.
    Lewis M; Elwyn G; Wood F
    Br J Gen Pract; 2003 Jun; 53(491):454-60. PubMed ID: 12939890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Feedback for general practitioners in training: quality, styles, and preferences.
    Prins FJ; Sluijsmans DM; Kirschner PA
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2006 Aug; 11(3):289-303. PubMed ID: 16832711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. GP perceptions of appraisal: professional development, performance management, or both?
    Boylan O; Bradley T; McKnight A
    Br J Gen Pract; 2005 Jul; 55(516):544-5. PubMed ID: 16004741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pilot study to develop and test a generic peer feedback instrument to review videotaped consultations in primary care.
    McMillan R; Cameron N; Power A
    Qual Prim Care; 2011; 19(6):347-54. PubMed ID: 22340897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Verifying appraisal evidence using feedback from trained peers: views and experiences of Scottish GP appraisers.
    Bowie P; Cameron N; Staples I; McMillan R; McKay J; Lough M
    Br J Gen Pract; 2009 Jul; 59(564):484-9. PubMed ID: 19566997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Referral letters to colorectal surgeons: the impact of peer-mediated feedback.
    Jiwa M; Walters S; Mathers N
    Br J Gen Pract; 2004 Feb; 54(499):123-6. PubMed ID: 14965392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Peer reviewer training and editor support: results from an international survey of nursing peer reviewers.
    Freda MC; Kearney MH; Baggs JG; Broome ME; Dougherty M
    J Prof Nurs; 2009; 25(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 19306833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. How do physicians assess their family physician colleagues' performance?: creating a rubric to inform assessment and feedback.
    Sargeant J; Macleod T; Sinclair D; Power M
    J Contin Educ Health Prof; 2011; 31(2):87-94. PubMed ID: 21671274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Peer coaching in clinical teaching: a case report.
    Flynn SP; Bedinghaus J; Snyder C; Hekelman F
    Fam Med; 1994 Oct; 26(9):569-70. PubMed ID: 7843505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Revalidation of general dental practitioners in Scotland: the results of a pilot study. Part 2 - acceptability to practitioners.
    Maidment YG; Rennie JS; Thomas M
    Br Dent J; 2006 Apr; 200(8):455-8; discussion 445. PubMed ID: 16703042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Can GPs audit their ability to detect psychological distress? One approach and some unresolved issues.
    Howe A
    Br J Gen Pract; 1998 Jan; 48(426):899-902. PubMed ID: 9604413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.