El "Libro Blanco de Grado en Farmacia", tierra de llegada o punto de partida. ¿Quo vadis Pharmacy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The both public and private Spanish Pharmacy Faculties jointed their efforts under the sponsorship of the Accreditation and Quality Evaluation National Agency (ANECA), with the purpose of to prepare a White Book of the Title of Grade in Pharmacy, in the context of the European higher education space (EEES). In this paper the outline conditions of that Project, i.e., the European Directives, are marked. A number of referents have been adopted as guide and models: the Consultative Committee of the European Union for the pharmacist’s formation, the Consultative Grouping of Vancouver (WHO), the Statement of Good Pharmacy Education Practice of Vienna (FIP), the Statements of General Principles of the Pharmaceutical Profession elaborated by the “Consejo General de Colegios Oficiales de Farmaceuticos”, as well as the Statements of La Laguna and Malta of the European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy (EAFP) and of the Pharmaceutical Group of the European Union (PGEU). The White Book paid a special attention to the borderlines with the informatics, molecular biology and care pharmacy, the incorporation of new matters to the curriculum being proposed as well as that of new descriptors. The CIN/2137/2008 regulation is, as a matter of fact, a projection and a reflex of the White Book and represents a substantial advance from the point of view of consolidated or new acquired professional competences for Pharmacy, in good agreement with the new roles assigned to the profession, directed towards the patient. A reflection with historical connotations is formulated at the end in connection with where we come from and towards where we want go on, emphasizing the value of pharmaceutical sciences and denoting the richness and interdisciplinary character of either the profession and studies of Pharmacy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.014 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".