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 *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28659125)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Does student confidence on multiple-choice question assessments provide useful information?
    Curtis DA; Lind SL; Boscardin CK; Dellinges M
    Med Educ; 2013 Jun; 47(6):578-84. PubMed ID: 23662875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Considering evidence for ethnicity bias using assessment case scenarios and medical student correctness and certainty.
    Tweed M; Purdie G; Lacey C
    N Z Med J; 2019 Mar; 132(1491):71-77. PubMed ID: 30845130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Using MCQ response certainty to determine how aspects of self-monitoring develop through a medical course.
    Tweed M; Willink R; Wilkinson TJ
    Med Educ; 2024 May; 58(5):535-543. PubMed ID: 37932950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A randomized controlled trial comparing instructions regarding unsafe response options in a MCQ examination.
    Tweed M; Wilkinson T
    Med Teach; 2009 Jan; 31(1):51-4. PubMed ID: 18825569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Defining and tracking medical student self-monitoring using multiple-choice question item certainty.
    Tweed M; Purdie G; Wilkinson T
    BMC Med Educ; 2020 Oct; 20(1):344. PubMed ID: 33023565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Determining measures of insight and foresight from responses to multiple choice questions.
    Tweed M; Thompson-Fawcett M; Schwartz P; Wilkinson TJ
    Med Teach; 2013; 35(2):127-33. PubMed ID: 23126243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Sure, or unsure? Measuring students' confidence and the potential impact on patient safety in multiple-choice questions.
    Rangel RH; Möller L; Sitter H; Stibane T; Strzelczyk A
    Med Teach; 2017 Nov; 39(11):1189-1194. PubMed ID: 28799435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Low performing students have insightfulness when they reflect-in-action.
    Tweed M; Purdie G; Wilkinson T
    Med Educ; 2017 Mar; 51(3):316-323. PubMed ID: 28084033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Usable knowledge, hazardous ignorance - beyond the percentage correct score.
    Dory V; Degryse J; Roex A; Vanpee D
    Med Teach; 2010; 32(5):375-80. PubMed ID: 20423255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. A comparative study of students' performance in preclinical physiology assessed by multiple choice and short essay questions.
    Oyebola DD; Adewoye OE; Iyaniwura JO; Alada AR; Fasanmade AA; Raji Y
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 2000; 29(3-4):201-5. PubMed ID: 11713989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The USMLE Step 2 CS: Time for a change.
    Alvin MD
    Med Teach; 2016 Aug; 38(8):854-6. PubMed ID: 27007882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison between Long-Menu and Open-Ended Questions in computerized medical assessments. A randomized controlled trial.
    Rotthoff T; Baehring T; Dicken HD; Fahron U; Richter B; Fischer MR; Scherbaum WA
    BMC Med Educ; 2006 Oct; 6():50. PubMed ID: 17032439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evidence-based decision about test scoring rules in clinical anatomy multiple-choice examinations.
    Severo M; Gaio AR; Povo A; Silva-Pereira F; Ferreira MA
    Anat Sci Educ; 2015; 8(3):242-8. PubMed ID: 25053378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Certainty-Based Marking on Multiple-Choice Items: Psychometrics Meets Decision Theory.
    Wu Q; Vanerum M; Agten A; Christiansen A; Vandenabeele F; Rigo JM; Janssen R
    Psychometrika; 2021 Jun; 86(2):518-543. PubMed ID: 33928520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. PeerWise and Pathology: Discontinuing a teaching innovation that did not achieve its potential.
    Smith CD; Dai A; Kenwright D; Grainger R
    MedEdPublish (2016); 2020; 9():27. PubMed ID: 38058910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing a script concordance examination to a multiple-choice examination on a core internal medicine clerkship.
    Kelly W; Durning S; Denton G
    Teach Learn Med; 2012; 24(3):187-93. PubMed ID: 22775780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Choosing medical assessments: Does the multiple-choice question make the grade?
    Pham H; Trigg M; Wu S; O'Connell A; Harry C; Barnard J; Devitt P
    Educ Health (Abingdon); 2018; 31(2):65-71. PubMed ID: 30531047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.