Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34017634›Full record

ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2020

A Global Comparison of Initial Pharmacy Education Curricula: An Exploratory Study.

Naoko Arakawa, Andreia Bruno-Tomé, Ian Bates

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [German pharmacy degree course: an international comparison].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Naoko ArakawaSchool of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, UK.
Andreia Bruno-ToméFaculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Australia.
Ian BatesUniversity College London, School of Pharmacy, UK.
Monash University · AUUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTime-tabled curricular contents and syllabi reflect the actual delivery of the academic programme and one of key quality components in healthcare professional education. There is a need of global evidence base of Initial Pharmacy Education and Training (IPET) curricula for assisting the advancement of IPET globally.

objectivesTo seek the differences and similarities among IPET curricula and to explore relative trends and weighting of IPET curricula globally.

methodsSample curricular documents were collected purposively either through a parallel survey study investigating the structures and processes of IPET globally in collaboration with the International Pharmaceutical Federation Education (FIPEd), or through research team network. Collected textual documents containing IPET curricular contents were analysed by a mixed approach of the comparative content and framework analyses, using curriculum clusters in a guideline from the PHARMINE project.

resultsIPET curricular documents were collected from 16 countries and territories. The study showed study years spent in the IPET years range from four to six years, and a sample mean of average syllabus time spent per year is 728 hours/year (excluding outlier). There was a biggest variance in the pharmacy practice cluster (PRAC) among samples, ranging from 49.3 to 12.8%, showing a significant negative correlation with the chemical science cluster (CHEM) a = -0.77 (p<.0001). Categorised further into three curricular content groups, the study identified that there was variances in a tendency of the curricular orientation of science or practice-focus between countries.

conclusionThe study allowed a first global comparison of IPET curricula from all WHO regions, which provided a better understanding of current IPET practice and delivery across nations and established evidence base to address challenges and gaps for further improvement of IPET curriculum in any country.

Indexed as

Content analysisCurriculumGlobal comparisonInitial Education and TrainingPharmacy Education

Identifiers

PMID34017634
PMCPMC8132530
OpenAlexW3010901578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.