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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28367465)

  • 21. Comparison of long-menu and single-best-answer multiple choice questions in computer-based summative assessments: a randomised controlled trial.
    Cerutti B; Stollar F; Escher M; Blondon K; Aujesky S; Nendaz M; Galetto-Lacour A
    BMC Med Educ; 2019 Jun; 19(1):219. PubMed ID: 31215430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Adding to the debate on the numbers of options for MCQs: the case for not being limited to MCQs with three, four or five options.
    Tweed M
    BMC Med Educ; 2019 Sep; 19(1):354. PubMed ID: 31521151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Psychometrics of Multiple Choice Questions with Non-Functioning Distracters: Implications to Medical Education.
    Deepak KK; Al-Umran KU; AI-Sheikh MH; Dkoli BV; Al-Rubaish A
    Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 2015; 59(4):428-35. PubMed ID: 27530011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The Impact of Repeated Exposure to Items.
    O'Neill TR; Sun L; Peabody MR; Royal KD
    Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(4):404-9. PubMed ID: 26507998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Statistical item analysis of the examination in anesthesiology for medical students using the Rasch model.
    Yang SC; Tsou MY; Chen ET; Chan KH; Chang KY
    J Chin Med Assoc; 2011 Mar; 74(3):125-9. PubMed ID: 21421207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Ensuring the quality of multiple-choice exams administered to small cohorts: A cautionary tale.
    Young M; Cummings BA; St-Onge C
    Perspect Med Educ; 2017 Feb; 6(1):21-28. PubMed ID: 28050882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Measurement characteristics of content-parallel single-best-answer and extended-matching questions in relation to number and source of options.
    Swanson DB; Holtzman KZ; Allbee K
    Acad Med; 2008 Oct; 83(10 Suppl):S21-4. PubMed ID: 18820493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Item analysis for the written test of Taiwanese board certification examination in anaesthesiology using the Rasch model.
    Chang KY; Tsou MY; Chan KH; Chang SH; Tai JJ; Chen HH
    Br J Anaesth; 2010 Jun; 104(6):717-22. PubMed ID: 20427368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Patients don't present with five choices: an alternative to multiple-choice tests in assessing physicians' competence.
    Veloski JJ; Rabinowitz HK; Robeson MR; Young PR
    Acad Med; 1999 May; 74(5):539-46. PubMed ID: 10353288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Exploring examinee behaviours as validity evidence for multiple-choice question examinations.
    Surry LT; Torre D; Durning SJ
    Med Educ; 2017 Oct; 51(10):1075-1085. PubMed ID: 28758233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Multiple true-false items: a comparison of scoring algorithms.
    Lahner FM; Lörwald AC; Bauer D; Nouns ZM; Krebs R; Guttormsen S; Fischer MR; Huwendiek S
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2018 Aug; 23(3):455-463. PubMed ID: 29189963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The psychometric properties of five scoring methods applied to the script concordance test.
    Bland AC; Kreiter CD; Gordon JA
    Acad Med; 2005 Apr; 80(4):395-9. PubMed ID: 15793026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The expert consensus guideline series. Optimizing pharmacologic treatment of psychotic disorders. Introduction: methods, commentary, and summary.
    Kane JM; Leucht S; Carpenter D; Docherty JP;
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2003; 64 Suppl 12():5-19. PubMed ID: 14640142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Distractor Efficiency in an Item Pool for a Statistics Classroom Exam: Assessing Its Relation With Item Cognitive Level Classified According to Bloom's Taxonomy.
    Testa S; Toscano A; Rosato R
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():1585. PubMed ID: 30210409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparing Item Performance on Three- Versus Four-Option Multiple Choice Questions in a Veterinary Toxicology Course.
    Royal K; Dorman D
    Vet Sci; 2018 Jun; 5(2):. PubMed ID: 29890727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Nonfunctional distractor analysis: An indicator for quality of Multiple choice questions.
    Sajjad M; Iltaf S; Khan RA
    Pak J Med Sci; 2020; 36(5):982-986. PubMed ID: 32704275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Certainty and safe consequence responses provide additional information from multiple choice question assessments.
    Tweed MJ; Stein S; Wilkinson TJ; Purdie G; Smith J
    BMC Med Educ; 2017 Jun; 17(1):106. PubMed ID: 28659125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Fixed or mixed: a comparison of three, four and mixed-option multiple-choice tests in a Fetal Surveillance Education Program.
    Zoanetti N; Beaves M; Griffin P; Wallace EM
    BMC Med Educ; 2013 Mar; 13():35. PubMed ID: 23453056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.