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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8736189)

  • 1. Computerized long-menu questions as an alternative to open-ended questions in computerized assessment.
    Schuwirth LW; van der Vleuten CP; Stoffers HE; Peperkamp AG
    Med Educ; 1996 Jan; 30(1):50-5. PubMed ID: 8736189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A closer look at cueing effects in multiple-choice questions.
    Schuwirth LW; van der Vleuten CP; Donkers HH
    Med Educ; 1996 Jan; 30(1):44-9. PubMed ID: 8736188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of long-menu and single-best-answer multiple choice questions in computer-based summative assessments: a randomised controlled trial.
    Cerutti B; Stollar F; Escher M; Blondon K; Aujesky S; Nendaz M; Galetto-Lacour A
    BMC Med Educ; 2019 Jun; 19(1):219. PubMed ID: 31215430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Comparing assessments of students' knowledge by computerized open-ended and multiple-choice tests.
    Anbar M
    Acad Med; 1991 Jul; 66(7):420-2. PubMed ID: 2059271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cueing in multiple choice questions: a reliable, valid and economical solution.
    Veloski JJ; Rabinowitz HK; Robeson MR
    Res Med Educ; 1988; 27():195-200. PubMed ID: 3218856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Testing of medical students with open-ended, uncued questions.
    Damjanov I; Fenderson BA; Veloski JJ; Rubin E
    Hum Pathol; 1995 Apr; 26(4):362-5. PubMed ID: 7705813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Long-menu questions in computer-based assessments: a retrospective observational study.
    Cerutti B; Blondon K; Galetto A
    BMC Med Educ; 2016 Feb; 16():55. PubMed ID: 26861755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analysis of testing with multiple choice versus open-ended questions: Outcome-based observations in an anatomy course.
    Melovitz Vasan CA; DeFouw DO; Holland BK; Vasan NS
    Anat Sci Educ; 2018 May; 11(3):254-261. PubMed ID: 28941215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Factors underlying performance on written tests of knowledge.
    Norman GR; Smith EK; Powles AC; Rooney PJ; Henry NL; Dodd PE
    Med Educ; 1987 Jul; 21(4):297-304. PubMed ID: 3626897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Analysis of orthopedic specialty knowledge and comparison of 2 written test methods].
    Grifka J; Elmer A
    Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 1998; 136(3):272-7. PubMed ID: 9736991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of cueing on written examinations of clinical decision making: a case study.
    Desjardins I; Touchie C; Pugh D; Wood TJ; Humphrey-Murto S
    Med Educ; 2014 Mar; 48(3):255-61. PubMed ID: 24528460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Different written assessment methods: what can be said about their strengths and weaknesses?
    Schuwirth LW; van der Vleuten CP
    Med Educ; 2004 Sep; 38(9):974-9. PubMed ID: 15327679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Comparison between computer-aided testing and traditional multiple choice: an equivalence study.
    Karl M; Graef F; Eitner S; Beck N; Wichmann M; Holst S
    Eur J Dent Educ; 2007 Feb; 11(1):38-41. PubMed ID: 17227394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparing narrative and multiple-choice formats in online communication skill assessment.
    Kim S; Spielberg F; Mauksch L; Farber S; Duong C; Fitch W; Greer T
    Med Educ; 2009 Jun; 43(6):533-41. PubMed ID: 19493177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Do medical students learn from multiple choice examinations?
    Rees PJ
    Med Educ; 1986 Mar; 20(2):123-5. PubMed ID: 3959926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Open-book tests: search behaviour, time used and test scores.
    Westerkamp AC; Heijne-Penninga M; Kuks JB; Cohen-Schotanus J
    Med Teach; 2013 Apr; 35(4):330-2. PubMed ID: 23327562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.