medical licensing
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

413
(FIVE YEARS 136)

H-INDEX

21
(FIVE YEARS 6)

2022 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra M. Arguello ◽  
Diep N. Edwards ◽  
Matthew R. Cohn ◽  
Michael D. Johnson ◽  
S. Elizabeth Ames ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Rubright ◽  
Michael Jodoin ◽  
Stephanie Woodward ◽  
Michael A. Barone

Author(s):  
H. Dapper ◽  
C. Belka ◽  
F. Bock ◽  
V. Budach ◽  
W. Budach ◽  
...  

AbstractThe new Medical Licensing Regulations 2025 (Ärztliche Approbationsordnung, ÄApprO) will soon be passed by the Federal Council (Bundesrat) and will be implemented step by step by the individual faculties in the coming months. The further development of medical studies essentially involves an orientation from fact-based to competence-based learning and focuses on practical, longitudinal and interdisciplinary training. Radiation oncology and radiation therapy are important components of therapeutic oncology and are of great importance for public health, both clinically and epidemiologically, and therefore should be given appropriate attention in medical education. This report is based on a recent survey on the current state of radiation therapy teaching at university hospitals in Germany as well as the contents of the National Competence Based Learning Objectives Catalogue for Medicine 2.0 (Nationaler Kompetenzbasierter Lernzielkatalog Medizin 2.0, NKLM) and the closely related Subject Catalogue (Gegenstandskatalog, GK) of the Institute for Medical and Pharmaceutical Examination Questions (Institut für Medizinische und Pharmazeutische Prüfungsfragen, IMPP). The current recommendations of the German Society for Radiation Oncology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Radioonkologie, DEGRO) regarding topics, scope and rationale for the establishment of radiation oncology teaching at the respective faculties are also included.


2021 ◽  
pp. 016327872110469
Author(s):  
Peter Baldwin ◽  
Janet Mee ◽  
Victoria Yaneva ◽  
Miguel Paniagua ◽  
Jean D’Angelo ◽  
...  

One of the most challenging aspects of writing multiple-choice test questions is identifying plausible incorrect response options—i.e., distractors. To help with this task, a procedure is introduced that can mine existing item banks for potential distractors by considering the similarities between a new item’s stem and answer and the stems and response options for items in the bank. This approach uses natural language processing to measure similarity and requires a substantial pool of items for constructing the generating model. The procedure is demonstrated with data from the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE®). For about half the items in the study, at least one of the top three system-produced candidates matched a human-produced distractor exactly; and for about one quarter of the items, two of the top three candidates matched human-produced distractors. A study was conducted in which a sample of system-produced candidates were shown to 10 experienced item writers. Overall, participants thought about 81% of the candidates were on topic and 56% would help human item writers with the task of writing distractors.


Author(s):  
Lewis A. Grossman

Choose Your Medicine is the first comprehensive history of the concept of freedom of therapeutic choice in the United States. It draws on legal history and the history of medicine (as well as political, intellectual, cultural, and social history) to examine the ways that persistent but evolving notions of a right to therapeutic choice have affected American law, regulation, and policy from the country’s origins to the present. It describes social movements and legal efforts dedicated to resisting government measures denying individuals an unfettered choice among therapeutic products and methods. The targets of this activism have included, among others, state medical licensing statutes, FDA restrictions on the distribution of unapproved drugs, state and federal prohibitions against medical marijuana, formulary limitations in government insurance programs, abortion restrictions, and prohibitions on physician-assisted suicide. The narrative’s protagonists range from unschooled supporters of botanical medicine in the early nineteenth century to sophisticated cancer patient advocacy groups in the twenty-first. The book considers how all of these examples, taken together, fit within the broader development of the idea of freedom of therapeutic choice in American history and law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document