Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33922513›Full record

ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Feedback for Learning in Pharmacy Education: A Scoping Review.

Nicholas R Nelson, Rebecca B Carlson, Amanda H Corbett, Dennis M Williams, Denise H Rhoney

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Closing the loop: Strengthening course quality of Pharm.D. program via applying a comprehensive four-step review approach.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024
    Article
  4. Considerations for conducting a scoping review in pharmacy education.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Navigating power dynamics between pharmacy preceptors and learners.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024
    Article
  7. A Scoping Review of the Hidden Curriculum in Pharmacy Education.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2023
    Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Nicholas R NelsonDivision of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7475, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5503-4043
Rebecca B CarlsonHealth Sciences Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7585, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4380-8435
Amanda H CorbettDivision of Pharmacotherapy and Experiential Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7569, USA.
Dennis M WilliamsDivision of Pharmacotherapy and Experiential Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7569, USA.
Denise H RhoneyDivision of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7475, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Feedback is an effective pedagogy aimed to create cognitive dissonance and reinforce learning as a key component of clinical training programs. Pharmacy learners receive constant feedback. However, there is limited understanding of how feedback is utilized in pharmacy education. This scoping review sought to summarize the breadth and depth of the use of feedback within pharmacy education and identify areas for future research. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for English articles since January 2000 to identify studies related to feedback in pharmacy education. Sixty-four articles were included for analysis, stratified by moderate and major theory talk, where moderate theory talk explicitly included feedback into study design and major theory talk included feedback into both study design and analysis. Feedback was provided in Bachelor (14%), Master (15.6%), Doctor of Pharmacy (67.2%) and post-graduate programs (4.7%) on a variety of curricular objectives including communication and patient work up in didactic, objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), and experiential settings, and career/interview preparation in the co-curriculum. Feedback comments were mostly written in didactic courses, and both written and verbal in OSCE, experiential, and co-curricular settings. The pharmacy education feedback literature lacks depth beyond student perceptions, especially with respect to assessing the effectiveness and quality of feedback for learning. While feedback has been utilized throughout pharmacy education across myriad outcomes, several areas for inquiry exist which can inform the design of faculty and preceptor development programs, ensuring provision of effective, quality feedback to pharmacy learners.

Indexed as

feedbackpharmacy educationscoping review

Identifiers

PMID33922513
PMCPMC8167641

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.