MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220871703 · doi:10.1093/ijpp/riac019.042

Developing mental health education: “It is a subject where most pharmacists [or pharmacy] students have no more knowledge than the general public”

2022· article· en· W4220871703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hannah Macfarlane, Judith Strawbridge, Hayley C. Gorton

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pharmacy Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacyMental healthThematic analysisMedicineMedical educationPharmacy practiceQuarter (Canadian coin)Health careNursingQualitative researchPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction With one quarter of people in the UK reporting a mental health problem, pharmacists have a vital role in mental health care. We previously explored pharmacy students’ views on the value of Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) training in preparing them to provide mental health care. (1) Within the questionnaire, students were given opportunity to discuss their experiences of mental health teaching and learning. The large amount of rich data generated lent itself to separate qualitative analysis. Aim To understand the main themes in pharmacy students’ reflections on mental health and pharmacy. Methods An anonymous, online questionnaire was distributed in February 2020.The original aim was to establish the attitudes and experiences of pharmacy students (n=232) in the UK and Ireland in relation to Mental Health First Aid Training (MHFA). Students across all year groups in the MPharm were invited, and 70% of respondents were in year 3 or 4. Students from eighteen universities responded, of which 80% were female. (1) Participants were also asked open questions to enable explanation and further expansion on their answers both about MHFA and about mental health and pharmacy generally. Comments ranged from short phrases to full paragraphs. These data were analysed by two authors (HG and HM), following Thematic Analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2) and adopting an interpretivist approach. Authors read and re-read open comments to develop understanding of the main themes discussed when students reflected on MH teaching, their own learning and the anticipated value of this in professional practice. To ensure rigour, the authors initially undertook their analysis separately and then agreed on the themes which best described the data. A third author, JS, reviewed the coding, agreed the proposed themes and revised subthemes. Results The identified themes were i) Mental health is important; ii) Pharmacists’ role and iii) So, teach me. Overall, students identified that ‘mental health is extremely important and often overlooked’. Most identified that pharmacists have a central role in mental health support and that mental health ‘needs to have a more important place in pharmacy than it does at the moment’. Students highlighted ‘concern[s] about communicating with mental health patients’ and managing ‘difficult situations’. They wanted to learn more about mental health and wanted this embedded across curricula. There was a fourth, crosscutting theme: stigma. Participants acknowledged the existence of stigma but felt it was reducing. Data included examples of othering, referring to people with mental illness as ‘them’ not ‘us’. Conclusion This study is the most contemporary, pan-university study of mental health in MPharm curricula in recent times. The potential for bias, given participants elected to engage in a questionnaire about MHFA was something borne in mind during analysis. Pharmacy students identified mental health to be an important aspect of health, where stigma still exits. Students recognised their potential future contribution in mental healthcare. It requires focus in pharmacy degrees which could ultimately support increasing pharmacists’ involvement in mental health. References (1) Gorton, H.C., Macfarlane, H., Edwards, R. et al. UK and Ireland survey of MPharm student and staff experiences of mental health curricula, with a focus on Mental Health First Aid. J of Pharm Policy and Pract14, 73 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40545-021-00364-1 (2) Braun V, Clarke V. Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide For Beginners. London: Sage; 2013.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.420 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Pharmacy PracticeSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207