ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2023
The specialized competency framework for industry pharmacists (SCF-IP): validation and pilot assessment.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a consensus-based competency framework for hospital pharmacists in the management of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs): a modified delphi study in Macao.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Assessing and validating the specialized competency framework for pharmacists in sales and marketing (SCF-PSM): a cross-sectional analysis in Lebanon.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Article
- Academic pharmacist competencies in ordinary and emergency situations: content validation and pilot description in Lebanese academia.BMC medical education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to validate a specialized competency framework for industry pharmacists and assess correlates related to the competency domains in a pilot sample.
methodsA team of experts assessed the old framework and improved its content validity after a thorough literature review, using the Delphi technique. Domains and their respective competencies and behaviors were re-defined in the framework. Afterward, a web-based cross-sectional study was carried out between March and October 2022, enrolling a convenient sample of ten industry pharmacists who worked in Lebanese pharmaceutical plants. Participants were contacted through the Syndicate of the Pharmaceutical Industries in Lebanon.
resultsThe specialized competency framework for Lebanese industry pharmacists comprised seven domains. Behavioral items had appropriate loading on their respective factors, which could involve one, two or three competencies. Cronbach alpha values for all domains were close to one, showing appropriate reliability. Each domain was correlated with at least another one, except for domains related to pharmaceutical and industrial development and emergency preparedness, which were not correlated with other domains. The lowest confidence was found in the research and development domain, particularly among participants with only a PharmD.
conclusionsThis study validated the specialized competency framework for Lebanese industry pharmacists. Some domains, specifically those related to industrial development and emergency preparedness, were found to diverge from others. Therefore, it would be recommended to include additional education in the emergency preparedness, research and development fields and to integrate industry-specific skills, courses, and training programs into academic curricula. Furthermore, specialized postgraduate degrees may be necessary to produce practice-ready pharmacists to operate effectively in this vital setting.
Indexed as
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.