MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906342860

Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy student perceptions of the entry-level Doctor of Pharmacy degree: A qualitative study

2018· article· en· W2906342860 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas E. Brownlee, Anan Ahmed, Kerry Mansell, Holly Mansell

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacy Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredentialPharmacyBachelorThematic analysisMedical educationPharmacy practiceQualitative researchLicensurePerceptionPsychologyMedicineNursingSociologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:  Canadian academic pharmacy institutions are undergoing a credential shift from a baccalaureate degree  to an entry-level Doctor of Pharmacy (ELPD). Objective: To characterise how Bachelor of Science in Pharmacy (BSP) students perceive this transition. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight randomly-selected students from each BSP class in 2017-18. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo qualitative analysis software. Results: Students’ opinions on the impact of the Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm.D.) varied (n=24). Six themes emerged: positive academic and social experiences, perceptions of the Pharm.D. programme, insecurities of BSP students, impact on future employment, mixed plans to pursue Pharm.D., and suggestions for improvement. Participants were concerned about Pharm.D. graduates being preferentially hired for hospital pharmacy jobs. Conclusion: Increased dialogue between faculty and students is necessary to provide reassurance. The credential shift to Pharm.D. should not deter BSP graduates’ desire to work in a specific practice setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacy EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207