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 *

407 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25310243)

  • 1. Medical school 2.0: How we developed a student-generated question bank using small group learning.
    Gooi AC; Sommerfeld CS
    Med Teach; 2015; 37(10):892-6. PubMed ID: 25310243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A novel student-led approach to multiple-choice question generation and online database creation, with targeted clinician input.
    Harris BH; Walsh JL; Tayyaba S; Harris DA; Wilson DJ; Smith PE
    Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(2):182-8. PubMed ID: 25893940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance.
    Walsh JL; Harris BHL; Denny P; Smith P
    Postgrad Med J; 2018 Feb; 94(1108):97-103. PubMed ID: 28866607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Innovative learning: employing medical students to write formative assessments.
    Chamberlain S; Freeman A; Oldham J; Sanders D; Hudson N; Ricketts C
    Med Teach; 2006 Nov; 28(7):656-9. PubMed ID: 17594561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Medical students create multiple-choice questions for learning in pathology education: a pilot study.
    Grainger R; Dai W; Osborne E; Kenwright D
    BMC Med Educ; 2018 Aug; 18(1):201. PubMed ID: 30134898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Training Medical Students to Create and Collaboratively Review Multiple-Choice Questions: A Comprehensive Workshop.
    Kurtz J; Holman B; Monrad SU
    MedEdPORTAL; 2020 Oct; 16():10986. PubMed ID: 33083537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Answering questions in a co-created formative exam question bank improves summative exam performance, while students perceive benefits from answering, authoring, and peer discussion: A mixed methods analysis of PeerWise.
    Guilding C; Pye RE; Butler S; Atkinson M; Field E
    Pharmacol Res Perspect; 2021 Aug; 9(4):e00833. PubMed ID: 34309243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Small group learning: effect on item analysis and accuracy of self-assessment of medical students.
    Biswas SS; Jain V; Agrawal V; Bindra M
    Educ Health (Abingdon); 2015; 28(1):16-21. PubMed ID: 26261109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. To quiz or not to quiz: Formative tests help detect students at risk of failing the clinical anatomy course.
    Azzi AJ; Ramnanan CJ; Smith J; Dionne É; Jalali A
    Anat Sci Educ; 2015; 8(5):413-20. PubMed ID: 25227111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Creating assessments as an active learning strategy: what are students' perceptions? A mixed methods study.
    Kurtz JB; Lourie MA; Holman EE; Grob KL; Monrad SU
    Med Educ Online; 2019 Dec; 24(1):1630239. PubMed ID: 31248355
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Practice makes perfect: the development of a medical student-led crowdsourced question bank for self-study in undergraduate medical education.
    Corrado M; McNeely C; Lefebvre I; Raichura R; Bogie BJ; Wood TJ
    Can Med Educ J; 2024 Aug; 15(4):127-129. PubMed ID: 39310317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Certainty rating in pre-and post-tests of study modules in an online clinical pharmacy course - A pilot study to evaluate teaching and learning.
    Luetsch K; Burrows J
    BMC Med Educ; 2016 Oct; 16(1):267. PubMed ID: 27741945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Student-written single-best answer questions predict performance in finals.
    Walsh J; Harris B; Tayyaba S; Harris D; Smith P
    Clin Teach; 2016 Oct; 13(5):352-6. PubMed ID: 26450346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mapping session learning objectives to exam questions: How to do it and how to apply the results.
    Jalloh C; Collins B; Lafleur D; Reimer J; Morrow A
    Med Teach; 2020 Jan; 42(1):66-72. PubMed ID: 31433256
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Fun, collaboration and formative assessment: skinquizition, a class wide gaming competition in a medical school with a large class.
    Schlegel EF; Selfridge NJ
    Med Teach; 2014 May; 36(5):447-9. PubMed ID: 24571695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Tackling student neurophobia in neurosciences block with team-based learning.
    Anwar K; Shaikh AA; Sajid MR; Cahusac P; Alarifi NA; Al Shedoukhy A
    Med Educ Online; 2015; 20():28461. PubMed ID: 26232115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Students generating questions for their own written examinations.
    Papinczak T; Babri AS; Peterson R; Kippers V; Wilkinson D
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2011 Dec; 16(5):703-10. PubMed ID: 19757127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effectiveness of e-Learning in a Medical School 2.0 Model: Comparison of Item Analysis for Student-Generated vs. Faculty-Generated Multiple-Choice Questions.
    Janzen BW; Sommerfeld C; Gooi ACC
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2019; 257():184-188. PubMed ID: 30741193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of unguided vs guided case-based instruction on the surgery clerkship.
    Adamas-Rappaport WJ; Waer AL; Teeple MK; Benjamin MA; Glazer ES; Sozanski J; Poskus D; Ong E
    J Surg Educ; 2013; 70(6):821-5. PubMed ID: 24209662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of peer-generated MCQs to assess and support learning in a problem-based learning programme.
    Botelho MG; Lam O; Watt RM; Leung D; Kember D
    Eur J Dent Educ; 2018 Aug; 22(3):e358-e363. PubMed ID: 29266581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 21.