Opening borders. Part One: The White Paper on the Pharmacy Degree: destination or point of departure. Quo vadis, Pharmacy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Spanish Pharmacy Faculties, both public and private, worked together, under the auspices of the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA), to prepare a White Paper on the Pharmacy Degree, within the framework of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). This study reviews the terms of the project, as set by existing European directives, and indicates the references adopted as guides and models. These include the following: the Advisory Committee on Pharmaceutical Training of the European Union; the Consultative Group of Vancouver (WHO); the Vienna Statement of Good Pharmacy Education Practice (FIP); the Statements of General Principles of the Pharmaceutical Profession drawn up by the General Council of the Official Colleges of Pharmacy in Spain, 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 Paper pays special attention to the interfaces with computing, molecular biology, and hospital pharmacy so that they are incorporated into the curricula as new material and, if necessary, as descriptors. Indeed, regulation CIN/2137/2008 is a projection and reflection of the proposal set out in the White Paper and is a substantial advance from the perspective of consolidated or newly acquired professional competences for pharmacy, in accordance with the new roles oriented towards the patient, which are being assigned to the profession. Finally, using historical connotations, the past role and the future direction of the pharmacy profession are considered, emphasizing the value of the pharmaceutical sciences, as well as the richness and interdisciplinary character of both the studies and profession 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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.032 |
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".