ArticleCanadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC
Relational professional identity: How do pharmacy students see themselves in relation to others?
Article in Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacy from the perspectives of other health professions: An intervention to foster professional identity among freshmen pharmacy students.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023Article
- Three perspectives on relational professional identity formation.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPCArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the pharmacy profession moves towards patient-centred care, pharmacy schools have updated their curricula to prepare students for a full scope of practice. A critical objective of the new curricula is the professional socialization of pharmacy students into relational aspects of the profession: how pharmacists should interact with patients and other health care professionals. Through an examination of how one cohort of pharmacy students perceives its relationship to patients and physicians, this study aims to determine how these relational aspects of professional identity evolve with time spent in the program.
methodsAt 3 time points over a 2-year period, pharmacy students were asked to detail in writing how they would communicate with a physician concerning a hypothetical drug allergy scenario. A directed content analysis of their responses was conducted based on 3 main analytic categories: patient-centredness, physician collaboration and physician deference. These categories were further divided into 6 subcategories that were used as the variables for analysis. Statistical analyses examined longitudinal group trends for these variables.
resultsOver the 2 years of observation, an examination of the proportion of messages demonstrating the subcategories of interest showed that the only measure of the pharmacy students' relational professional identity that changed significantly over time occurred for the perception of a sense of shared care for the patient. All other aspects of their relational identity were stagnant and did not change as they progressed through training (χ
conclusionOur results suggest that the relational professional identity of participants was poorly developed with regards to both patients and physicians. Pharmacy educators must reexamine the methods currently being employed to foster students' professional identity development to ensure that new graduates are prepared to meet the challenges of a changing scope of practice.
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.