Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20414441›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2010

A five-state continuing professional development pilot program for practicing pharmacists.

Anna Legreid Dopp, Jennifer R Moulton, Michael J Rouse, CoraLynn B Trewet

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Forty Years of ACPE CPE Accreditation.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anna Legreid DoppUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison School of Pharmacy, USA.
Jennifer R Moulton
Michael J Rouse
CoraLynn B Trewet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether a structured educational intervention would support pharmacists' utilization of a continuing professional development (CPD) model compared to pharmacist control subjects.

methodsA prospective, randomized, observational case-control study of CPD was conducted in which pharmacists participated in several educational interventions, and study and control groups completed prestudy and poststudy survey instruments.

resultsSurvey data from 57 pharmacists (n = 28 study, n = 29 control) were analyzed and significant outcomes from the CPD stages of reflect, plan, act, evaluate, and record were found between matched study subjects and study and control group comparisons.

conclusionsWith appropriate training and support, pharmacists can utilize a CPD approach to their lifelong learning and professional development.

Indexed as

CertificationCase-Control StudiesClinical CompetenceEducation, Pharmacy, ContinuingFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternetMaleModels, EducationalNeeds AssessmentPilot ProjectsProgram DevelopmentSchools, PharmacySocieties, PharmaceuticalSurveys and Questionnairescontinuing educationcontinuing professional developmentportfolioreflectionself-assessment

Identifiers

PMID20414441
PMCPMC2856417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.