ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2016
A Mixed-Methods Analysis in Assessing Students' Professional Development by Applying an Assessment for Learning Approach.
Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning analytics for enhanced professional capital development: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Evaluation of an Instrument to Assess Students' Personal and Professional Development During the Faculty Advising Process.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2021Article
- Where the rubber meets the road - An integrative review of programmatic assessment in health care professions education.Perspectives on medical education · 2021Review
- Using Focus Groups to Explore Evolving Perceptions of Student Pharmacists' Curricular Experiences.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2020Article
- Determining Indicators of High-Quality Application Activities for Team-Based Learning.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2019Article
- Perspectives of Pharmacy Graduates Toward an Undergraduate Ethics Course and Its Potential Impact on Their Professional Practice.Advances in medical education and practice · 2019Article
- TargetingAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. To describe an approach for assessing the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education's (ACPE) doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) Standard 4.4, which focuses on students' professional development. Methods. This investigation used mixed methods with triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data to assess professional development. Qualitative data came from an electronic developmental portfolio of professionalism and ethics, completed by PharmD students during their didactic studies. Quantitative confirmation came from the Defining Issues Test (DIT)-an assessment of pharmacists' professional development. Results. Qualitatively, students' development reflections described growth through this course series. Quantitatively, the 2015 PharmD class's DIT N2-scores illustrated positive development overall; the lower 50% had a large initial improvement compared to the upper 50%. Subsequently, the 2016 PharmD class confirmed these average initial improvements of students and also showed further substantial development among students thereafter. Conclusion. Applying an assessment for learning approach, triangulation of qualitative and quantitative assessments confirmed that PharmD students developed professionally during this course series.
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.