ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Evaluating the Quality of the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for New Pharmacy Graduates.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Development and Content Validation of Entrustable Professional Activities for Community Pharmacy Practice Experiences in Brazil.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
- How Have Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) Been Implemented in Pharmacy Education? A Scoping Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Entrustable professional activities-based objective structured clinical examinations in a pharmacy curriculum.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the quality of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Core Entrustable Professional Activities (Core EPAs) for New Pharmacy Graduates according to standards outlined in competency-based education literature utilizing the Queen's EPA Quality (EQual) rubric. A cohort of pharmacists with EPA expertise rated Core EPA quality with the EQual rubric and provided recommendations for revisions. A generalizability study determined the reliability of the EQual ratings with pharmacist users. Nine pharmacists responded (4.4%). Most EPAs (9/15) did not reach the overall cut-off score, indicating low quality. EPAs 1 through 5 and EPA 14 (fulfill a medication order) were deemed high quality. EPA 12 (use evidence-based information to advance patient care) scored the lowest at 3.47 (SEM 0.29). EPA 14 scored the highest at 4.60 (SEM 0.14). EPA 15 (create a written plan for continuous professional development) was the only EPA to fail to reach the cut-off across all EQual domains. EPAs in the Patient Care Provider Domain received significantly higher ratings than other EPAs. On average, three respondents recommended revision for each. Most comments aligned with the EPA's EQual rubric performance. The generalizability study analysis revealed excellent reliability (G = 0.80). Determining EPA quality utilizing objective measurement tools should drive EPA development and revisions to more accurately reflect the roles, responsibilities, and expectations of pharmacists on the healthcare team.
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.