ArticleBMC medical education2021
Evaluating pharmacy students' knowledge and skills in reproductive, maternal, new-born and child health care at a South African university.
Article in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Evaluation of Pharmacy Students' Knowledge and Skills in Maternal and Child Health: Traditional versus Integrated Curriculum.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Development and Implementation of an Integrated Framework for Undergraduate Pharmacy Training in Maternal and Child Health at a South African University.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
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
Abstract
backgroundMaternal and child mortality is a global concern and one of South Africa's quadruple burdens of disease. As easily accessible frontline healthcare workers, pharmacists play an important role in the continuum of maternal and child health (MCH) care according to recommendations by international health regulatory bodies. Pharmacy schools are obliged to train pharmacy students to meet the priority health needs of the population so that graduates are 'fit for purpose'. The baseline study aimed to evaluate the knowledge and skills of 2017 final year pharmacy students who were exposed to a fragmented MCH care curriculum at a university in South Africa to inform curriculum review.
methodsA descriptive, quantitative, non-randomized study was conducted among final year pharmacy students using a self-administered structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed in sections to assess participants' knowledge of reproductive and sexual health (RSH), maternal and antenatal care (MAC), neonatal and child care (NCC) and skills related to infant growth assessment procedures. Data was analysed descriptively using frequencies and percentages. A score of 50% in each section of the questionnaire indicated a pass. Participants assessed their exposure to MCH topics in the curriculum.
resultsOf the 89 available students, 61% consented to participate in the study. The average scores attained for each section were; 62.4% for RSH, 54.5% for MAC, 50.4% for NCC and 25.3% for infant growth assessment. The pass rate was 78% for RSH, 56% for MAC, 57% for NCC, and 19% for infant growth assessment. About 13% of the participants passed all the knowledge and the skills sections. Age, gender, being a parent or doing locums did not have any influence on participants' performance. Participants reported that they had more on-campus curriculum content exposure to RSH compared to other MCH care topics.
conclusionFinal year pharmacy students showed adequate knowledge of RSH with adequate curriculum exposure. Average knowledge of MAC, NCC and poor skills in infant growth assessment which corresponded to curriculum exposure was observed. The results suggest the need for improvement in the current curriculum in the affected areas to adequately equip students to render desirable services.
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.