ArticleMedicine2020
Effect of the international pharmacy education programs: A pilot evaluation based on Kirkpatrick's model.
Article in Medicine, 2020. 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.
- Exploring the problems and coping strategies of pharmacy internship in large general hospitals in China: from the perspective of preceptors.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Promotion of training course on ICD-10 Poisoning coding : necessity to adopt preventive strategies.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Evaluating the effect of an in-service training workshop on ICD-10 coding instructions of pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium for clinical coders.Journal of medicine and lifeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Globalization has attracted much attention to universities over the past decade. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the United States-China international pharmacy education programs (IPEP) in China.Kirkpatrick's model of evaluation was used to evaluate IPEP from reaction and learning levels. In the reaction level, a questionnaire survey with a Likert scale was used. In the learning level, data from "Assessment Record of Advanced Clinical Pharmacy Practice of Peking University" were collected. Cronbach' α coefficient of reliability was calculated, principal component analysis and independent t-test were conducted.All of the students who attended IPEP (n = 36) completed the questionnaire survey. The scores of benefits were increased in 4 categories, including "Clinical practice competency improvement" (mean ranking [MR] = 3.11 points), "Understanding of doctor of Pharmacy education mode" (MR = 3.48 points), "English competency improvement" (MR = 3.64 points) and "International collaboration" (MR = 3.92 points). Meanwhile, the overall satisfaction was relatively high with the IPEP (MR = 4.22 points). In the learning level, a total of 22 records was obtained. Students who attended (n = 5) the IPEP achieved higher scores than those did not attend (n = 17) in the assessment records, although no statistical significant differences were observed. Personal in-depth interviews further supported the overall benefit of IPEP.The Kirkpatrick model of evaluation can be used for IPEP. The benefit and satisfaction of students attended the IPEP were high in the reaction level; even though no statistically significant difference was shown in the learning level, higher scores were still demonstrated.
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.