MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078778621 · doi:10.2147/amep.s29922

An online module series to prepare pharmacists to facilitate student engagement in patient-centered care delivery: development and evaluation

2012· article· en· W2078778621 on OpenAlexaff
Rosemin Kassam, Kwong, Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Medical Education and Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowball samplingExperiential learningMedical educationAccreditationVariety (cybernetics)PharmacyExperiential educationMedicinePsychologyComputer scienceNursingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Accreditation bodies across North America have adopted revised standards that place increased emphasis on experiential education and preceptors to promote and demonstrate patient-centered, pharmaceutical care practices to students. Since such practices are still evolving, challenges exist in recruiting skilled preceptors who are prepared to provide such opportunities. An online educational module series titled "A Guide to Pharmaceutical Care" (The Guide) was developed and evaluated to facilitate this transition. The objectives of this paper are: (1) to describe the development of the modules; and (2) to present the evaluation results from its pilot testing. METHODS: The Guide was developed as an online, self-directed training program. It begins by providing an overview of patient care (PC) philosophy and practice, and then discusses the tools that facilitate PC. It also provides a range of tips to support students as they provide PC during their experiential learning. Pharmacists participating in the pilot study were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling techniques. A pre-post quantitative survey with additional open-ended questions was used to evaluate the modules. RESULTS: THE MODULES INCORPORATED A VARIETY OF TEACHING STRATEGIES: self-reflection exercises, quizzes to review important concepts, quick tips, flash cards, and video clips to illustrate more in-depth learning. Thirty-two pharmacists completed the pre-post assessment and reported significant increases in their confidence because of this training. The most influenced outcome was "Application of techniques to facilitate learning opportunities that enable pharmacy students to practice pharmaceutical care competencies." They also indicated that the training clarified necessary changes in their teaching techniques as well as increased their own practice skills. CONCLUSION: The study results indicated that a series of self-paced online modules with appropriate content improved the pharmacists' confidence to nurture students' experiential learning for PC practice as well as enhanced their PC knowledge and skills within their own practices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Medical Education and PracticeSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207