ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2012
An active-learning laboratory on immunizations.
Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- A Modified Delphi Involving Laboratory Faculty to Define Essential Skills for Pharmacy Graduates.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2021Article
- Article
- Joint Statement on Pediatric Education at Schools of Pharmacy.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2020Article
- Immunization Education in US Pharmacy Colleges and Schools.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2019Article
- Educational Games as a Teaching Tool in Pharmacy Curriculum.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2015Review
- Student knowledge and confidence in an elective clinical toxicology course using active-learning techniques.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo implement and evaluate an active-learning laboratory activity to teach pharmacy students about influenza, pneumococcal, and shingles vaccines.
designThe laboratory session was divided into 6 immunization stations: 3 stations on influenza including a pediatrics station, and 1 station each for pneumococcal, shingles, and anaphylaxis. ASSESSMENT: Although 118 of 123 (95.9%) students had completed an immunization training certificate prior to attending the laboratory, the average score on a pre-assessment to measure immunization knowledge and confidence was 56%. The post-assessment score was 87.4%. Students' confidence improved by 18.7% to 51.2% in each of the 5 areas assessed. Most respondents rated the activity overall as good or excellent on a post-activity evaluation.
conclusionAn active-learning approach to teaching immunizations allowed students to gain knowledge in simulated real-world experiences and reinforced key concepts on influenza, pneumococcal, and shingles vaccines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.