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 *

277 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23419201)

  • 1. Difficulty and discrimination indices of multiple-choice examination items in a college of pharmacy therapeutics and pathophysiology course sequence.
    Caballero J; Wolowich WR; Benavides S; Marino J
    Int J Pharm Pract; 2014 Feb; 22(1):76-83. PubMed ID: 23419201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Relationship between assessment item format and item performance characteristics.
    Phipps SD; Brackbill ML
    Am J Pharm Educ; 2009 Dec; 73(8):146. PubMed ID: 20221339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Is a picture worth a thousand words: an analysis of the difficulty and discrimination parameters of illustrated vs. text-alone vignettes in histology multiple choice questions.
    Holland J; O'Sullivan R; Arnett R
    BMC Med Educ; 2015 Oct; 15():184. PubMed ID: 26502882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reducing the number of options on multiple-choice questions: response time, psychometrics and standard setting.
    Schneid SD; Armour C; Park YS; Yudkowsky R; Bordage G
    Med Educ; 2014 Oct; 48(10):1020-7. PubMed ID: 25200022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Implementation and faculty assessment of an oral examination in a therapeutics course in a distance synchronous education pharmacy programme.
    Benavides S; Borja-Hart NL; Maniscalco-Feichtl M
    Int J Pharm Pract; 2011 Dec; 19(6):438-43. PubMed ID: 22060241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Collaborative Examination Item Review Process in a Team-Taught, Self-Care Sequence.
    Caldwell DJ; Sampognaro L; Pate AN
    Am J Pharm Educ; 2015 Aug; 79(6):87. PubMed ID: 26430274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of images on item statistics in multiple choice anatomy examinations.
    Notebaert AJ
    Anat Sci Educ; 2017 Jan; 10(1):68-78. PubMed ID: 27472765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Development of a Summative Examination with Subject Matter Expert Validation.
    Castleberry AN; Schneider EF; Carle MH; Stowe CD
    Am J Pharm Educ; 2016 Mar; 80(2):29. PubMed ID: 27073282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Relationship between item difficulty and discrimination indices in true/false-type multiple choice questions of a para-clinical multidisciplinary paper.
    Sim SM; Rasiah RI
    Ann Acad Med Singap; 2006 Feb; 35(2):67-71. PubMed ID: 16565756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Item Analysis of Multiple-Choice Questions in Teaching Prosthodontics.
    Madhav VN
    J Dent Educ; 2015 Nov; 79(11):1314-9. PubMed ID: 26522636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Tips for developing a valid and reliable bank of multiple choice questions (MCQs).
    Sadaf S; Khan S; Ali SK
    Educ Health (Abingdon); 2012; 25(3):195-7. PubMed ID: 23823639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Analyzing script concordance test scoring methods and items by difficulty and type.
    Wilson AB; Pike GR; Humbert AJ
    Teach Learn Med; 2014; 26(2):135-45. PubMed ID: 24702549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Psychometric analysis of a scale assessing self-efficacy for cultural competence in patient counseling.
    Assemi M; Cullander C; Hudmon KS
    Ann Pharmacother; 2006 Dec; 40(12):2130-5. PubMed ID: 17090728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Do images influence assessment in anatomy? Exploring the effect of images on item difficulty and item discrimination.
    Vorstenbosch MA; Klaassen TP; Kooloos JG; Bolhuis SM; Laan RF
    Anat Sci Educ; 2013; 6(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22674609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The impact of item-writing flaws and item complexity on examination item difficulty and discrimination value.
    Rush BR; Rankin DC; White BJ
    BMC Med Educ; 2016 Sep; 16(1):250. PubMed ID: 27681933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Item analysis: the impact of distractor efficiency on the difficulty index and discrimination power of multiple-choice items.
    Rezigalla AA; Eleragi AMESA; Elhussein AB; Alfaifi J; ALGhamdi MA; Al Ameer AY; Yahia AIO; Mohammed OA; Adam MIE
    BMC Med Educ; 2024 Apr; 24(1):445. PubMed ID: 38658912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Investigating the potential influence of established multiple-choice test-taking cues on item response in a pharmacotherapy board certification examination preparatory manual: a pilot study.
    Gettig JP
    Pharmacotherapy; 2006 Apr; 26(4):558-62. PubMed ID: 16553516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Nonrestricted multiple-choice examination items.
    Kolstad R; Goaz P; Kolstad R
    J Dent Educ; 1982 Aug; 46(8):485-8. PubMed ID: 6954178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.