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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8166919)

  • 1. Analyzing and adjusting for variables in a large-scale standardized-patient examination.
    Battles JB; Carpenter JL; McIntire DD; Wagner JM
    Acad Med; 1994 May; 69(5):370-6. PubMed ID: 8166919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of repeat information on examinee performance for a large-scale standardized-patient examination.
    Swygert KA; Balog KP; Jobe A
    Acad Med; 2010 Sep; 85(9):1506-10. PubMed ID: 20736678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An objective structured clinical examination for evaluating psychiatric clinical clerks.
    Hodges B; Regehr G; Hanson M; McNaughton N
    Acad Med; 1997 Aug; 72(8):715-21. PubMed ID: 9282149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sequential testing in a high stakes OSCE: Determining number of screening tests.
    Currie GP; Sivasubramaniam S; Cleland J
    Med Teach; 2016 Jul; 38(7):708-14. PubMed ID: 26474117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Augmenting physician examiner scoring in objective structured clinical examinations: including the standardized patient perspective.
    Roy M; Wojcik J; Bartman I; Smee S
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2021 Mar; 26(1):313-328. PubMed ID: 32816242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Order effects in high stakes undergraduate examinations: an analysis of 5 years of administrative data in one UK medical school.
    Burt J; Abel G; Barclay M; Evans R; Benson J; Gurnell M
    BMJ Open; 2016 Oct; 6(10):e012541. PubMed ID: 27729351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A Student Assessment Tool for Standardized Patient Simulations (SAT-SPS): Psychometric analysis.
    Castro-Yuste C; García-Cabanillas MJ; Rodríguez-Cornejo MJ; Carnicer-Fuentes C; Paloma-Castro O; Moreno-Corral LJ
    Nurse Educ Today; 2018 May; 64():79-84. PubMed ID: 29459196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Gender, sequence of cases and day effects on clinical skills assessment with standardized patients.
    Gispert R; Rué M; Roma J; Martinez-Carretero JM
    Med Educ; 1999 Jul; 33(7):499-503. PubMed ID: 10354333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Standardized (simulated) patients' accuracy in recording clinical performance check-list items.
    Vu NV; Marcy MM; Colliver JA; Verhulst SJ; Travis TA; Barrows HS
    Med Educ; 1992 Mar; 26(2):99-104. PubMed ID: 1565039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Patient Findings Questionnaire: one solution to an important standardized patient examination problem.
    Williams RG; McLaughlin MA; Eulenberg B; Hurm M; Nendaz MR
    Acad Med; 1999 Oct; 74(10):1118-24. PubMed ID: 10536634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Six years of comprehensive, clinical, performance-based assessment using standardized patients at the Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
    Vu NV; Barrows HS; Marcy ML; Verhulst SJ; Colliver JA; Travis T
    Acad Med; 1992 Jan; 67(1):42-50. PubMed ID: 1729994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of using two or more standardized patients to simulate the same case on case means and case failure rates.
    Colliver JA; Robbs RS; Vu NV
    Acad Med; 1991 Oct; 66(10):616-8. PubMed ID: 1910405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Gender differences in examinee performance on the Step 2 Clinical Skills data gathering (DG) and patient note (PN) components.
    Swygert KA; Cuddy MM; van Zanten M; Haist SA; Jobe AC
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2012 Oct; 17(4):557-71. PubMed ID: 22041870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Setting and maintaining standards in multiple choice examinations: AMEE Guide No. 37.
    Bandaranayake RC
    Med Teach; 2008; 30(9-10):836-45. PubMed ID: 19117221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Practical considerations in equating progress tests.
    Langer MM; Swanson DB
    Med Teach; 2010; 32(6):509-12. PubMed ID: 20515383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Measurement precision for repeat examinees on a standardized patient examination.
    Raymond MR; Swygert KA; Kahraman N
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2012 Aug; 17(3):325-37. PubMed ID: 21964951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. OSCE performance evaluations made by standardized patients: comparing checklist and global rating scores.
    Regehr G; Freeman R; Robb A; Missiha N; Heisey R
    Acad Med; 1999 Oct; 74(10 Suppl):S135-7. PubMed ID: 10536618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of task exposure on repeat candidate scores in a high-stakes standardized patient assessment.
    Boulet JR; McKinley DW; Whelan GP; Hambleton RK
    Teach Learn Med; 2003; 15(4):227-32. PubMed ID: 14612253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The consistency and uncertainty in examiners' definitions of pass/fail performance on OSCE (objective structured clinical examination) stations.
    Rothman AI; Blackmore D; Cohen R; Reznick R
    Eval Health Prof; 1996 Mar; 19(1):118-24. PubMed ID: 10186899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluating construct equivalence and criterion-related validity for repeat examinees on a standardized patient examination.
    Raymond MR; Kahraman N; Swygert KA; Balog KP
    Acad Med; 2011 Oct; 86(10):1253-9. PubMed ID: 21869669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.