Essential Elements for Core Required Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experiences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ince 2004, concerns and calls for greater quality assurance in experiential education have been published. The Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) "Standards 2016" provide limited differentiation across the four required practice experiences, and, as such, schools interpret them differently. Both schools and accreditation site visit teams would benefit from a common set of guidance for the required Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experiences (APPEs), so that they can ensure consistency and quality in student experiences across practice sites. To address this need for greater standardization, a taskforce of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Experiential Education (EE) Section conducted a peer-reviewed, consensus-building process, including experiential faculty and staff across multiple colleges and schools of pharmacy, to determine a common set of elements that could be used to bring consistency to the experiences and expectations for student learning in practice. Over a two year period, the taskforce reviewed the relevant literature and then drafted and revised the elements through an iterative process which allowed for established EE consortia and members of the EE section to review the draft and provide input for revision. The resulting essential elements presented here can be used to guide faculty and staff within experiential education programs in their quality assurance processes in ensuring students receive consistent experience as part of their education prior to graduation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it