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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34421122)

  • 21. Automated essay scoring and the future of educational assessment in medical education.
    Gierl MJ; Latifi S; Lai H; Boulais AP; De Champlain A
    Med Educ; 2014 Oct; 48(10):950-62. PubMed ID: 25200016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Polytomous modeling of cognitive errors in computer adaptive testing.
    Wang L; Li CS
    J Appl Meas; 2001; 2(4):356-78. PubMed ID: 12011504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effort in Low-Stakes Assessments: What Does It Take to Perform as Well as in a High-Stakes Setting?
    Attali Y
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2016 Dec; 76(6):1045-1058. PubMed ID: 29795900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Modeling Item Revisit Behavior: The Hierarchical Speed-Accuracy-Revisits Model.
    Bezirhan U; von Davier M; Grabovsky I
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2021 Apr; 81(2):363-387. PubMed ID: 37929265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Influences on medical students' self-regulated learning after test completion.
    Agrawal S; Norman GR; Eva KW
    Med Educ; 2012 Mar; 46(3):326-35. PubMed ID: 22324532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Progress testing in the medical curriculum: students' approaches to learning and perceived stress.
    Chen Y; Henning M; Yielder J; Jones R; Wearn A; Weller J
    BMC Med Educ; 2015 Sep; 15():147. PubMed ID: 26362199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Computerized adaptive testing for testlet-based innovative items.
    Kang HA; Han S; Betts J; Muntean W
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2022 Feb; 75(1):136-157. PubMed ID: 34462913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Introducing the General Polytomous Diagnosis Modeling Framework.
    Chen J; de la Torre J
    Front Psychol; 2018; 9():1474. PubMed ID: 30186195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Institutional strategies related to test-taking behavior in low stakes assessment.
    Schüttpelz-Brauns K; Hecht M; Hardt K; Karay Y; Zupanic M; Kämmer JE
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2020 May; 25(2):321-335. PubMed ID: 31641942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Impact of item-writing flaws in multiple-choice questions on student achievement in high-stakes nursing assessments.
    Tarrant M; Ware J
    Med Educ; 2008 Feb; 42(2):198-206. PubMed ID: 18230093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. On the Sequential Hierarchical Cognitive Diagnostic Model.
    Zhang X; Wang J
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():579018. PubMed ID: 33117245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Clarifying the Effect of Test Speededness.
    Hong MR; Cheng Y
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 Nov; 43(8):611-623. PubMed ID: 31551639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Impact of different scoring algorithms applied to multiple-mark survey items on outcome assessment: an in-field study on health-related knowledge.
    Domnich A; Panatto D; Arata L; Bevilacqua I; Apprato L; Gasparini R; Amicizia D
    J Prev Med Hyg; 2015; 56(4):E162-71. PubMed ID: 26900331
    [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. A Mixture IRTree Model for Performance Decline and Nonignorable Missing Data.
    Huang HY
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2020 Dec; 80(6):1168-1195. PubMed ID: 33116331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Examining the Process of Responding to Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values Items: Should Ideal Point Scoring Methods Be Considered?
    Ling Y; Zhang M; Locke KD; Li G; Li Z
    J Pers Assess; 2016; 98(3):310-8. PubMed ID: 26421444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A comparison of three polytomous item response theory models in the context of testlet scoring.
    Cook KF; Dodd BG; Fitzpatrick SJ
    J Outcome Meas; 1999; 3(1):1-20. PubMed ID: 10063769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The effect of a 'don't know' option on test scores: number-right and formula scoring compared.
    Muijtjens AM; Mameren HV; Hoogenboom RJ; Evers JL; van der Vleuten CP
    Med Educ; 1999 Apr; 33(4):267-75. PubMed ID: 10336757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Assessment of practical science in high stakes examinations: a qualitative analysis of high performing English-speaking countries.
    Erduran S; El Masri Y; Cullinane A; Ng Y
    Int J Sci Educ; 2020 Aug; 42(9):1544-1567. PubMed ID: 33633433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Fitting Item Response Theory Models to Two Personality Inventories: Issues and Insights.
    Chernyshenko OS; Stark S; Chan KY; Drasgow F; Williams B
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2001 Oct; 36(4):523-62. PubMed ID: 26822181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.