EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 16 / Numéro 4 (Novembre 2015) Pédagogie Médicale, 16 4 (2015) 205-217 References
Free Access
Issue
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 16, Number 4, Novembre 2015
Page(s) 205 - 217
Section Recherche et perspectives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2016018
Published online 30 mai 2016
  1. Higgs J, Jones MA. Clinical reasoning in the health professions (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  2. Curry L, Wergin JF. Educating professionals: responding to new expectations for competence and accountability. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  3. Nendaz M, Charlin B, Leblanc V, Bordage G. Le raisonnement clinique: données issues de la recherche et implications pour l’enseignement. Pédagogie Médicale 2005;6:235-54. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ausubel DP, Novak JD, Hanesian H. Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice Hall, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  6. Vygotskij LS, Cole M. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Nachdr. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bernard J, Reyes P. Apprendre, en médecine (1re partie). Pédagogie Médicale 2001;2:163-9. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  8. Piaget J. L’équilibration des structures cognitives. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kaufman DM. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Applying educational theory in practice. BMJ 2003;25:213-6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Harrison A, Glasgow N, Townsend T. Communication skills training early in the medical curriculum: The UAE experience. Med Teach 1996;18:35-41. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Humphris GM, Kaney S. Assessing the development of communication skills in undergraduate medical students. Med Educ 2001;35:225-31. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Knox JD, Bouchier IA. Communication skills teaching, learning and assessment. Med Educ 1985;19:285-9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Poole AD, Sanson-Fisher RW. Understanding the patient: a neglected aspect of medical eduction. Soc Sci Med 1979;13:37-43. [Google Scholar]
  14. Cuenot S, Cochand P, Lanares J, Feihl F, Bonvin R, Guex P, et al. L’apport du patient simulé dans l’apprentissage de la relation médecin-malade : résultats d’une évaluation préliminaire. Pédagogie Médicale 2005;6:216-24. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cleland JA, Abe K, Rethans J-J. The use of simulated patients in medical education: AMEE Guide No 42. Med Teach 2009;31:477-86. [Google Scholar]
  16. Rethans J-J, Gorter S, Bokken L, Morrison L. Unannounced standardised patients in real practice: a systematic literature review. Med Educ 2007;41:537-49. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Vygotski L. Pensée et langage. Paris : Editions Sociales, 1985;32:44-6. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bruner JS. Acts of meaning. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  19. Berger PL, Luckmann T. The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kopp KC, Johnson JA. Checklist agreement between standardized patients and faculty. J Dent Educ 1995;59:824-9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Finlay IG, Stott NC, Kinnersley P. The assessment of communication skills in palliative medicine: a comparison of the scores of examiners and simulated patients. Med Educ 1995;29:424-9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Cooper C, Mira M. Who should assess medical students’ communication skills: their academic teachers or their patients? Med Educ 1998;32:419-21. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hodges B, McIlroy JH. Analytic global OSCE ratings are sensitive to level of training. Med Educ 2003;37:1012-6. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rohrer D, Pashler H. Recent Research on Human Learning Challenges Conventional Instructional Strategies. Educ Res 2010;39:406-12. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Peitzman SJ, Cuddy MM. Performance in Physical Examination on the USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills Examination: Acad Med 2015;90:209-13. [Google Scholar]
  26. Messick S. Validity. In: Educational Measurement (3rd ed). American Council on Education and Macmillan. New York: RL Linn, 1989:13-104. [Google Scholar]
  27. American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington DC: AERA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  28. Pottier P, Hardouin J-B, Dejoie T, Castillo J-M, Le Loupp A-G, Planchon B, et al. Effect of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Stressors on Clinical Skills Performance in Third-Year Medical Students. J Gen Intern Med 2015;30:1259-69. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. LeBlanc VR, McConnell MM, Monteiro SD. Predictable chaos: a review of the effects of emotions on attention, memory and decision making. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2015;20:265-82. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96. Med Teach 2015;37:312-22. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Chen R, Grierson LE, Norman GR. Evaluating the impact of high- and low-fidelity instruction in the development of auscultation skills. Med Educ 2015;49:276-85. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Collins JP, Harden RM. AMEE Medical Education Guide No. 13: real patients, simulated patients and simulators in clinical examinations. Med Teach 1998;20:508-21. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Khan KZ, Gaunt K, Ramachandran S, Pushkar P. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part II: Organisation & Administration. Med Teach 2013;35:1447-63. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.