Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21088732›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2010

The status of PhD education in economic, social, and administrative sciences between 2005 and 2008.

Joel F Farley, Chi-Chuan Wang, Susan J Blalock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Rethinking Our Human Resources.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2016
    Article
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

3 authors.

Joel F FarleyEshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Campus Box 7573, 2204 Kerr Hall, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. jffarley@unc.edu
Chi-Chuan Wang
Susan J Blalock

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the funding, education, enrollment, and graduation patterns from economic, social, and administrative sciences PhD programs in colleges and schools of pharmacy in the United States.

methodsEconomic, social, and administrative sciences PhD programs were identified from the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Web site. A 41-item online survey instrument was sent to the director of graduate studies of each identified program. Only programs offering a PhD degree were included in the study.

resultsOf the 26 programs surveyed, 20 (77%) provided useable responses to the survey instrument. Approximately 91% of PhD programs guarantee funding to incoming students with an average commitment of 2.9 years. On average, students were paid a stipend of $18,000 per year for commitments to research and teaching assistantships, each averaging approximately 2 years in length. Programs admitted an average of 3.5 students per year and graduated approximately 85% of entering students. The majority of students are non-US citizens and accept positions in either academic or industrial positions after graduation.

conclusionsMost economic, social, and administrative sciences PhD programs guarantee funding to incoming PhD candidates. Programs offering funding packages significantly below the average may be at a competitive disadvantage. It is unclear whether the number of students graduating from PhD programs is adequate to fulfill academic and industrial needs.

Indexed as

Economics, PharmaceuticalEducation, Pharmacy, GraduateFacultyFellowships and ScholarshipsHumansInternetPharmacy AdministrationResearch PersonnelSchools, PharmacySocial SciencesStudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesTeachingUnited Statesacademiadoctor of philosophygraduate educationsocial and administrative sciences

Identifiers

PMID21088732
PMCPMC2972521

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.