Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28970400›Full record

ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2016

The Second Round of the PHAR-QA Survey of Competences for Pharmacy Practice.

Jeffrey Atkinson, Kristien De Paepe, Antonio Sánchez Pozo, Dimitrios Rekkas, Daisy Volmer, Jouni Hirvonen, Borut Bozic, Agnieska Skowron, Constantin Mircioiu, Annie Marcincal and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Production of the PHAR-QA Competence Framework.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

13 authors.

Jeffrey AtkinsonPharmacology Department, Lorraine University, 5 Rue Albert Lebrun, Nancy 54000, France. jeffrey.atkinson@univ-lorraine.fr.
Kristien De PaepeDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, Brussels 1090, Belgium. kdepaepe@vub.ac.be.
Antonio Sánchez PozoFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Granada, Campus Universitario de la Cartuja s/n, Granada 18701, Spain. sanchezp@ugr.es.
Dimitrios RekkasSchool of Pharmacy, National and Kapodistrian University Athens, Panepistimiou 30, Athens 10679, Greece. rekkas@pharm.uoa.gr.
Daisy VolmerInstitute of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, Tartu 50411, Estonia. daisy.volmer@ut.ee.ORCID 0000-0001-6742-5044
Jouni HirvonenPharmacy Faculty, University of Helsinki, Yliopistonkatu 4, P.O. Box 33-4, Helsinki 00014, Finland. jouni.hirvonen@helsinki.fi.
Borut BozicFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, Askerceva Cesta 7, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia. Borut.Bozic@ffa.uni-lj.si.
Agnieska SkowronPharmacy Faculty, Jagiellonian University, Golebia 24, Krakow 31-007, Poland. askowron@cm-uj.krakow.pl.
Constantin MircioiuPharmacy Faculty, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Carol Davila" Bucharest, Dionisie Lupu 37, Bucharest 020021, Romania. constantin.mircioiu@yahoo.com.
Annie MarcincalFaculty of Pharmacy, European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy, Université de Lille 2, Lille 59000, France. annie.marcincal@pharma.univ-lille2.fr.
Andries KosterDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80082, Utrecht 3508 TB, The Netherlands. A.S.Koster@uu.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-7772-4654
Keith WilsonSchool of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham B47ET, UK. k.a.wilson@aston.ac.uk.
Chris van SchravendijkMedical Faculty, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, Brussels 1090, Belgium. chrisvs@vub.ac.be.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper presents the results of the second European Delphi round on the ranking of competences for pharmacy practice and compares these data to those of the first round already published. A comparison of the numbers of respondents, distribution by age group, country of residence, etc., shows that whilst the student population of respondents changed from Round 1 to 2, the populations of the professional groups (community, hospital and industrial pharmacists, pharmacists in other occupations and academics) were more stable. Results are given for the consensus of ranking and the scores of ranking of 50 competences for pharmacy practice. This two-stage, large-scale Delphi process harmonized and validated the Quality Assurance in European Pharmacy Education and Training (PHAR-QA) framework and ensured the adoption by the pharmacy profession of a framework proposed by the academic pharmacy community. The process of evaluation and validation of ranking of competences by the pharmacy profession is now complete, and the PHAR-QA consortium will now put forward a definitive PHAR-QA framework of competences for pharmacy practice.

Indexed as

competenceseducationframeworkpharmacypractice

Identifiers

PMID28970400
PMCPMC5419365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.