Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34544739›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2021

Improving the Remediation Process for Skills-based Laboratory Courses in the Doctor of Pharmacy Curriculum.

Jennifer S Chen, David E Matthews, Jared Van Hooser, Laura E Knockel, Kim Lintner, Morgan Stoa, Jamie L Woodyard, Deanna Tran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Jennifer S ChenUniversity of Minnesota, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota chen0666@umn.edu.
David E MatthewsThe Ohio State University, College of Pharmacy, Columbus, Ohio.
Jared Van HooserUniversity of Minnesota, College of Pharmacy, Duluth, Minnesota.
Laura E KnockelUniversity of Iowa, College of Pharmacy, Iowa City, Iowa.
Kim LintnerUniversity of Wisconsin - Madison, School of Pharmacy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Morgan StoaUniversity of Minnesota, College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Jamie L WoodyardPurdue University, College of Pharmacy, West Lafayette, Indiana.
Deanna TranUniversity of Maryland, School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When students fail to meet minimum competence standards on summative pharmacy skills-based assessments, remediation can be used to ensure student readiness for progression. Skills-based remediation is challenging as a high volume of resources is required to develop an action plan that addresses the heterogeneity in student needs and to create and execute another assessment equivalent to the initial assessment. Although many Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) programs face these same challenges, there is no consensus on how to best address them. Recently, faculty from six PharmD programs convened to share ideas and approaches to overcoming these challenges. This commentary aims to define remediation as it pertains to summative skills-based assessments, share our consensus views regarding remediation best practices, and highlight areas where there is more work to be done. Our intent is to advance the ongoing conversation and empower institutions to develop their own effective and impactful skills-based remediation policies, procedures, and activities.

Indexed as

Education, PharmacyPharmacyStudents, PharmacyCurriculumFacultyHumansLaboratoriescompetenceremediationskillsskills lab

Identifiers

PMID34544739
PMCPMC8499664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.