ArticlePharmacy practice
Appraisal of the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) patient care provider domain by North Dakota pharmacists.
Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Quality of the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for New Pharmacy Graduates.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) of the population health promoter domain by North Dakota pharmacists.Pharmacy practiceArticle
- Appraisal of the entrustable professional activities interprofessional team member domain performed by North Dakota pharmacists.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEntrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) are the latest addition to a list of professional competencies that pharmacy educational organizations support, and accreditation organizations require, for assessment by colleges and schools of pharmacy.
objectiveThe study's objective is to assess the use of Core EPAs in the patient care domain (by practice setting, position, and preceptor status) in contemporary pharmacy practice.
methodsThis survey assessed the EPA activities of pharmacists practicing in North Dakota. The pharmacists were asked "how many times in the past 30 days have you delivered the following services in your practice setting?" Response options were: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 or more times.
resultsOf 990 potential respondents, 457 pharmacists (46.1%) returned a survey, and 107 (10.8%) answered every survey item in the patient care domain. Respondents reported that the highest rated activity items "Collect information to identify a patient's medication-related problems and health-related needs," and "Analyze information to determine the effects of medication therapy, identify medication-related problems, and prioritize health-related needs" were performed an average of 3.9 times per week (SD=1.8), and 3.8 times per week (SD=2.0), respectively. Both of these items, were reported for 70% of the respondents at 5 or more times per week. For these items, the highest reported practice setting was 'other' practice settings (e.g., long-term care, community health centers) followed by chains, hospitals, and independent pharmacies. By position, clinical pharmacists and preceptors reported the highest activity levels for most EPAs and supportive example tasks.
conclusionsThis study provides empirical evidence suggesting (but not proving) that EPAs have potential as a means to assess outcomes in pharmacy education and practice. Our study sets the stage for future work that further refines and assesses core EPA activities and supportive example tasks to measure the impact of how this process relates to outcomes of care.
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.