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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39022328)

  • 1. Associations between item characteristics and statistical performance for paediatric medical student multiple choice assessments.
    Bosi I; O'Mara D; Clark T; Patabendige NS; Kennedy SE; Gunasekera H
    MedEdPublish (2016); 2023; 13():270. PubMed ID: 39022328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Writing Multiple Choice Questions-Has the Student Become the Master?
    Pham H; Court-Kowalski S; Chan H; Devitt P
    Teach Learn Med; 2023; 35(3):356-367. PubMed ID: 35491868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of clinical-scenario (case cluster) versus stand-alone multiple choice questions in a problem-based learning environment in undergraduate medicine.
    Vuma S; Sa B
    J Taibah Univ Med Sci; 2017 Feb; 12(1):14-26. PubMed ID: 31435208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Climbing Bloom's taxonomy pyramid: Lessons from a graduate histology course.
    Zaidi NB; Hwang C; Scott S; Stallard S; Purkiss J; Hortsch M
    Anat Sci Educ; 2017 Sep; 10(5):456-464. PubMed ID: 28231408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Postexamination item analysis of undergraduate pediatric multiple-choice questions exam: implications for developing a validated question Bank.
    Rashwan NI; Aref SR; Nayel OA; Rizk MH
    BMC Med Educ; 2024 Feb; 24(1):168. PubMed ID: 38383427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Is a picture worth a thousand words: an analysis of the difficulty and discrimination parameters of illustrated vs. text-alone vignettes in histology multiple choice questions.
    Holland J; O'Sullivan R; Arnett R
    BMC Med Educ; 2015 Oct; 15():184. PubMed ID: 26502882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of MCQs from MOOCs for common item writing flaws.
    Costello E; Holland JC; Kirwan C
    BMC Res Notes; 2018 Dec; 11(1):849. PubMed ID: 30509321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Evaluation of Modified Essay Questions (MEQ) and Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) as a tool for Assessing the Cognitive Skills of Undergraduate Medical Students.
    Khan MU; Aljarallah BM
    Int J Health Sci (Qassim); 2011 Jan; 5(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 22489228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of Cognitive levels and Item writing flaws in Medical Pharmacology Internal Assessment Examinations.
    Tariq S; Tariq S; Maqsood S; Jawed S; Baig M
    Pak J Med Sci; 2017; 33(4):866-870. PubMed ID: 29067055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Item Analysis of Single Best Response Type Multiple Choice Questions for Formative Assessment in Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
    Kulshreshtha S; Gupta G; Goyal G; Gupta K; Davda K
    J Obstet Gynaecol India; 2024 Jun; 74(3):256-264. PubMed ID: 38974743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Examining the impact of specific types of item-writing flaws on student performance and psychometric properties of the multiple choice question.
    Pham H; Besanko J; Devitt P
    MedEdPublish (2016); 2018; 7():225. PubMed ID: 38089249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Psychometric characteristics and response times for content-parallel extended-matching and one-best-answer items in relation to number of options.
    Swanson DB; Holtzman KZ; Allbee K; Clauser BE
    Acad Med; 2006 Oct; 81(10 Suppl):S52-5. PubMed ID: 17001136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effectiveness of e-Learning in a Medical School 2.0 Model: Comparison of Item Analysis for Student-Generated vs. Faculty-Generated Multiple-Choice Questions.
    Janzen BW; Sommerfeld C; Gooi ACC
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2019; 257():184-188. PubMed ID: 30741193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Effect of Faculty Training on Quality of Multiple-Choice Questions.
    Gupta P; Meena P; Khan AM; Malhotra RK; Singh T
    Int J Appl Basic Med Res; 2020; 10(3):210-214. PubMed ID: 33088746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Ten tips for effective use and quality assurance of multiple-choice questions in knowledge-based assessments.
    Ali K; Zahra D
    Eur J Dent Educ; 2024 May; 28(2):655-662. PubMed ID: 38282273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.