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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36306368)

  • 1. Utility of a multimodal computer-based assessment format for assessment with a higher degree of reliability and validity.
    Renes J; van der Vleuten CPM; Collares CF
    Med Teach; 2023 Apr; 45(4):433-441. PubMed ID: 36306368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison between three option, four option and five option multiple choice question tests for quality parameters: A randomized study.
    Vegada B; Shukla A; Khilnani A; Charan J; Desai C
    Indian J Pharmacol; 2016; 48(5):571-575. PubMed ID: 27721545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Very-short-answer questions: reliability, discrimination and acceptability.
    Sam AH; Field SM; Collares CF; van der Vleuten CPM; Wass VJ; Melville C; Harris J; Meeran K
    Med Educ; 2018 Apr; 52(4):447-455. PubMed ID: 29388317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Correlation of MCQ and SEQ scores in written undergraduate ophthalmology assessment.
    Mahmood H
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2015 Mar; 25(3):185-8. PubMed ID: 25772958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A solution to the cueing effects of multiple choice questions: the Un-Q format.
    Veloski JJ; Rabinowitz HK; Robeson MR
    Med Educ; 1993 Jul; 27(4):371-5. PubMed ID: 8412880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reliability, validity and efficiency of multiple choice question and patient management problem item formats in assessment of clinical competence.
    Norcini JJ; Swanson DB; Grosso LJ; Webster GD
    Med Educ; 1985 May; 19(3):238-47. PubMed ID: 4010571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Should essays and other "open-ended"-type questions retain a place in written summative assessment in clinical medicine?
    Hift RJ
    BMC Med Educ; 2014 Nov; 14():249. PubMed ID: 25431359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A report on the piloting of a novel computer-based medical case simulation for teaching and formative assessment of diagnostic laboratory testing.
    Kreiter CD; Haugen T; Leaven T; Goerdt C; Rosenthal N; McGaghie WC; Dee F
    Med Educ Online; 2011 Jan; 16():. PubMed ID: 21249173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Can computer-based assessment enhance the acceptance of formative multiple choice exams? A utility analysis.
    Karay Y; Schauber SK; Stosch C; Schuettpelz-Brauns K
    Med Teach; 2012; 34(4):292-6. PubMed ID: 22404878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Item format statistics and readability of extended matching questions as an effective tool to assess medical students.
    Frey A; Leutritz T; Backhaus J; Hörnlein A; König S
    Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):20982. PubMed ID: 36470965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessment of Global Health Education: The Role of Multiple-Choice Questions.
    Douthit NT; Norcini J; Mazuz K; Alkan M; Feuerstein MT; Clarfield AM; Dwolatzky T; Solomonov E; Waksman I; Biswas S
    Front Public Health; 2021; 9():640204. PubMed ID: 34368038
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance equivalency between computer-based and traditional pen-and-paper assessment: A case study in clinical anatomy.
    Guimarães B; Ribeiro J; Cruz B; Ferreira A; Alves H; Cruz-Correia R; Madeira MD; Ferreira MA
    Anat Sci Educ; 2018 Mar; 11(2):124-136. PubMed ID: 28817229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of the problem based learning-driven with the traditional didactic-lecture-based curricula.
    Zahid MA; Varghese R; Mohammed AM; Ayed AK
    Int J Med Educ; 2016 Jun; 7():181-7. PubMed ID: 27289331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: a literature review.
    McCoubrie P
    Med Teach; 2004 Dec; 26(8):709-12. PubMed ID: 15763874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. The validity and reliability of the sixth-year internal medical examination administered at the King Abdulaziz University Medical College.
    Fallatah HI; Tekian A; Park YS; Al Shawa L
    BMC Med Educ; 2015 Feb; 15():10. PubMed ID: 25638149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.