Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974344›Full record

ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2021

Design of a foundational sciences curriculum: Applying the ICAP framework to pharmacology education in integrated medical curricula.

Kelly M Quesnelle, Naunihal T Zaveri, Stephen D Schneid, Joe B Blumer, John L Szarek, Marieke Kruidering, Michael W Lee

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reimagining pharmacology education.Pharmacological reviews · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors.

Kelly M QuesnelleDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2408-1904
Naunihal T ZaveriDepartment of Integrated Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
Stephen D SchneidSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Joe B BlumerDepartment of Cell and Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0020-3815
John L SzarekDepartment of Medical Education, Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA, USA.
Marieke KruideringDepartment of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Michael W LeeDepartment of Medical Education, Department of Oncology, Live Strong Cancer Institutes, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8954-2057

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expectations for physicians are rapidly changing, as is the environment in which they will practice. In response, preclerkship medical education curricula are adapting to meet these demands, often by reducing the time for foundational sciences. This descriptive study compares preclerkship pharmacology education curricular practices from seven allopathic medical schools across the United States. We compare factors and practices that affect how pharmacology is integrated into the undergraduate medical education curriculum, including teaching techniques, resources, time allocated to pharmacology teaching, and assessment strategies. We use data from seven medical schools in the United States, along with results from a literature survey, to inform the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches and to raise important questions that can guide future research regarding integration of foundational sciences in medical school and health professions' curricula. In this comparative study, we found that there is significant heterogeneity in the number of hours dedicated to pharmacology in the preclerkship curriculum, whereas there was concordance in the use of active learning pedagogies for content delivery. Applying the ICAP (Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive) Framework for cognitive engagement, our data showed that pharmacology was presented using more highly engaging pedagogies during sessions that are integrated with other foundational sciences. These findings can serve as a model that can be applied beyond pharmacology to other foundational sciences such as genetics, pathology, microbiology, biochemistry, etc.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduatePharmacology, ClinicalSchools, MedicalUnited Statesactive learningbasic scienceICAP frameworkintegrationmedical educationmulti institutionalpharmacologypharmacology educatorPhIGpre-clinical

Identifiers

PMID33974344
PMCPMC8112301

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.