Pharmacy Student Attitudes to Patient Education: A Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A significant level of interest in patient-centredness, one of the components required for effective interaction with patients, is being shown in health communication circles. By adopting a patient-centred approach in the process of patient consultation, pharmacists strive to ensure safe and effective medicine use. The purpose of this study was to explore pharmacy student attitudes toward patient education and patient-centredness as they progressed through a 4-year program. Methods: One class year of pharmacy students at the University of Saskatchewan volunteered to complete a self-administered survey each year of their program to longitudinally assess their confidence in and difficulty with patient consultation, their level of patient empathy and their orientation toward patient-centredness. Results: Noticeable changes were seen in all constructs, especially from first to second year. Gender appeared to influence 2 of the constructs: patient-centredness and empathy. Conclusion: A combination of overall life experience, pharmacy undergraduate training and practice site experience likely contributed to the observed results. While attempting to quantify such constructs is of interest and may turn out to be a useful monitoring component, observation of student behaviour during objective structured clinical exams likely will continue to be the most valuable tool.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".