• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

过敏与免疫学再认证:历史回顾,特别强调1983年的考试。

Recertification in allergy and immunology: an historical review with special emphasis on the 1983 examination.

作者信息

Slavin R G, Des Prez L, Mansmann H C, Meskauskas J A, Pierson W

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1985 Mar;75(3):334-7. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(85)90068-5.

DOI:10.1016/0091-6749(85)90068-5
PMID:3973308
Abstract

Recertification offers a method of evaluating a diplomate's cognitive knowledge of allergy and immunology. In 1983 candidates for the American Board of Allergy and Immunology recertification examination were offered the entire certifying examination but were informed that they would, for recertification purposes, be held responsible only for a subset of questions judged to be particularly clinically relevant. All 40 candidates elected to take the entire certifying examination. Differences between the performance of certifying and recertifying candidates on the recertifying questions were small. Except for the five-choice questions, the differences in performance between the two groups on the remaining questions were also small in an absolute sense. Recertification performance was not related to the time of original certification. Ninety-eight percent of the candidates completed a questionnaire after the examination. Ninety percent stated that they would encourage their colleagues to participate in the recertification process.

摘要

再认证提供了一种评估专科医师过敏与免疫学认知知识的方法。1983年,美国过敏与免疫学会再认证考试的考生被提供了完整的认证考试,但被告知,出于再认证目的,他们仅需对被判定为特别具有临床相关性的一部分问题负责。所有40名考生都选择参加完整的认证考试。认证考生和再认证考生在再认证问题上的表现差异很小。除了五选一的问题外,两组在其余问题上的表现差异从绝对值来看也很小。再认证表现与初次认证时间无关。98%的考生在考试后填写了一份问卷。90%的考生表示他们会鼓励同事参与再认证过程。

相似文献

1
Recertification in allergy and immunology: an historical review with special emphasis on the 1983 examination.过敏与免疫学再认证:历史回顾,特别强调1983年的考试。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1985 Mar;75(3):334-7. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(85)90068-5.
2
The American Board of Orthodontics: Diplomate recertification.美国正畸委员会:专科医师再认证
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Dec;126(6):650-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.10.001.
3
Use of Urodynamic Studies among Certifying and Recertifying Urologists from 2003 to 2014.2003年至2014年期间,认证和重新认证泌尿外科医生对尿动力学研究的使用情况。
Urol Pract. 2017 May;4(3):251-256. doi: 10.1016/j.urpr.2016.07.001. Epub 2016 Oct 13.
4
A method of self-directed learning in continuing medical education with implications for recertification.一种继续医学教育中的自我导向学习方法及其对再认证的启示。
Ann Intern Med. 1987 Dec;107(6):909-13. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-107-6-909.
5
The american board of allergy and immunology. Report on the 1974 certifying examination.美国过敏与免疫学委员会。1974年认证考试报告。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1975 Feb;55(2):140-4. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(75)90057-3.
6
The 30th anniversary of the American Board of Allergy and Immunology: then and now.美国过敏与免疫学委员会成立30周年:过去与现在。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2001 Apr;107(4):592-4. doi: 10.1067/mai.2001.114244.
7
ABAI's MOC Assessment of Knowledge Program Matures: Adding Value with Continuous Learning and Assessment.行为分析认证委员会(ABAI)的知识项目MOC评估走向成熟:通过持续学习与评估创造价值。
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2017 Jan-Feb;5(1):80-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2016.11.017.
8
Continuing competency in orthopaedics: the future of recertification.骨科领域的持续胜任能力:再认证的未来。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Aug;449:72-5. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000229287.91226.b2.
9
The first certifying examination in pediatric rheumatology.儿科风湿病领域的首次认证考试。
J Rheumatol. 1998 Jun;25(6):1187-90.
10
A 9-year comparison of practice profiles of candidates for primary and recertification examinations of the American Board of Plastic Surgery relative to economic indicators.一项针对美国整形外科学会初级和再认证考试候选人实践情况与经济指标的 9 年比较。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Mar;131(3):425e-434e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31827c7086.