672 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26045510)
21. Good experiences with an audience response system used in medical education.
Jensen JV; Ostergaard D; Faxholt AK
Dan Med Bull; 2011 Nov; 58(11):A4333. PubMed ID: 22047931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Effectiveness of an audience response system on orthodontic knowledge retention of undergraduate dental students--a randomised control trial.
Robson N; Popat H; Richmond S; Farnell DJ
J Orthod; 2015; 42(4):307-14. PubMed ID: 26282015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The role of video technology in on-line lectures for the deaf.
Debevc M; Peljhan Z
Disabil Rehabil; 2004 Sep; 26(17):1048-59. PubMed ID: 15371041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Live lecture versus video-recorded lecture: are students voting with their feet?
Cardall S; Krupat E; Ulrich M
Acad Med; 2008 Dec; 83(12):1174-8. PubMed ID: 19202495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Evaluation of an interactive case simulation system in dermatology and venereology for medical students.
Wahlgren CF; Edelbring S; Fors U; Hindbeck H; Ståhle M
BMC Med Educ; 2006 Aug; 6():40. PubMed ID: 16907972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Effect of Computer-Assisted Learning on Students' Dental Anatomy Waxing Performance.
Kwon SR; Hernández M; Blanchette DR; Lam MT; Gratton DG; Aquilino SA
J Dent Educ; 2015 Sep; 79(9):1093-100. PubMed ID: 26329034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Assessing the Impact of Voice-Over Screen-Captured Presentations Delivered Online on Dental Students' Learning.
Schönwetter DJ; Gareau-Wilson N; Cunha RS; Mello I
J Dent Educ; 2016 Feb; 80(2):141-8. PubMed ID: 26834131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Using technology to increase student (and faculty satisfaction with) engagement in medical education.
Kay D; Pasarica M
Adv Physiol Educ; 2019 Sep; 43(3):408-413. PubMed ID: 31408381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A prospective study of medical students' perspective of teaching-learning media: reiterating the importance of feedback.
Dhaliwal U
J Indian Med Assoc; 2007 Nov; 105(11):621-3, 636. PubMed ID: 18405087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Academic performance of dental students: A randomised trial comparing live, audio recorded and video recorded lectures.
Shqaidef AJ; Abu-Baker D; Al-Bitar ZB; Badran S; Hamdan AM
Eur J Dent Educ; 2021 May; 25(2):377-384. PubMed ID: 33021047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A randomised trial of an online lecture with and without audio.
Spickard A; Smithers J; Cordray D; Gigante J; Wofford JL
Med Educ; 2004 Jul; 38(7):787-90. PubMed ID: 15200403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Creating learner-centered classrooms: use of an audience response system in pediatric dentistry education.
Johnson JT
J Dent Educ; 2005 Mar; 69(3):378-81. PubMed ID: 15749949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The audience response system and knowledge gain: a prospective study.
Tregonning AM; Doherty DA; Hornbuckle J; Dickinson JE
Med Teach; 2012; 34(4):e269-74. PubMed ID: 22455719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Cross analysis of knowledge and learning methods followed by French residents in cardiology.
Menet A; Assez N; Lacroix D
Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2015; 108(8-9):420-7. PubMed ID: 25921839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Are all hands-on activities equally effective? Effect of using plastic models, organ dissections, and virtual dissections on student learning and perceptions.
Lombardi SA; Hicks RE; Thompson KV; Marbach-Ad G
Adv Physiol Educ; 2014 Mar; 38(1):80-6. PubMed ID: 24585474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Audience response techniques for 21st century radiology education.
Richardson ML
Acad Radiol; 2014 Jul; 21(7):834-41. PubMed ID: 24833568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Effectiveness of an e-learning tool for education on pressure ulcer evaluation.
Morente L; Morales-Asencio JM; Veredas FJ
J Clin Nurs; 2014 Jul; 23(13-14):2043-52. PubMed ID: 24354930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Dental anatomy carving computer-assisted instruction program: an assessment of student performance and perceptions.
Nance ET; Lanning SK; Gunsolley JC
J Dent Educ; 2009 Aug; 73(8):972-9. PubMed ID: 19648568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system.
Gauci SA; Dantas AM; Williams DA; Kemm RE
Adv Physiol Educ; 2009 Mar; 33(1):60-71. PubMed ID: 19261762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Investigation into the impact of audience response devices on short- and long-term content retention.
Rush BR; White BJ; Allbaugh RA; Jones ML; Klocke EE; Miesner M; Towle-Millard HA; Roush JK
J Vet Med Educ; 2013; 40(2):171-6. PubMed ID: 23709112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
