SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Assessment and evaluation of prescribing competences: A systematic review and recommendations.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global and regional knowledge of antibiotic use and resistance among healthcare students: A systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Assessment and evaluation of prescribing competences: A systematic review and recommendations.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Prescribing competence: The pros and cons of different methods for assessment.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Assessment of clinical pharmacology and competence during medicine clerkships.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Pharmacology educators as leaders of programmatic assessment for safe prescribing in competency-based medical education.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- The Feasibility and Quality of the European Prescribing Exam: An International Multicenter Pilot Study Among 3109 Medical Students From 16 Medical Schools.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsSince assessment of prescribing competence is a key promoter of student learning and achievement, we aim to summarize existing national-level approaches, provide a systematic review of current literature, indicate the frequency of various methodologies, and make recommendations to promote and extend existing practice.
methodsRegulatory body websites were accessed for details of national examinations. PubMed, Embase, the Allied and Complementary Medicine, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched in August 2023 for studies in English from Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand reporting assessment of prescribing competencies among students/practitioners. Additional articles were identified through citation tracking.
resultsNational approaches are described for several jurisdictions. A total of 20 514 articles were retrieved, of which 54 met the inclusion criteria. Most articles came from the UK, with medical students and qualified doctors most frequently featured. Multiple choice formats were most common, with short answer questions, calculations and scenario-based skills tests also featured. Direct observations of skills through Objective Structured Clinical Examinations and similar methods were less commonly described. Test reliability generally employed Classical Test Theory. Costs of developing and delivering assessments, differential attainment by demographics, and predictive validity were not indicated.
conclusionWe recommend measurement of the predictive validity of prescribing competence assessments, the routine inclusion of performance by demographic characteristics, extension of competence assessments to professions other than medicine, and structured reporting of methods and findings, including costs and cost-effectiveness. Situational judgement tests would be a valuable addition to assessment practices.
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.