ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
The integration of the British Pharmacological Society's prescription safety assessment into the WHO 6-step model of rational pharmacotherapy in a Turkish medical school.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The integration of the British Pharmacological Society's prescription safety assessment into the WHO 6-step model of rational pharmacotherapy in a Turkish medical school.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Using assessment in pharmacology to drive learning in the right direction.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 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
Abstract
aimsAt Koç University School of Medicine, a one-week rational pharmacotherapy (RPHM) programme, modelled after WHO 6-step, has been introduced in the fourth-year curriculum to improve prescription skills. For efficient problem-based learning (PBL) sessions on a prespecified topic, students need to brush up on basic pharmacology knowledge, so we implemented the British Pharmacological Society (BPS)-Prescribing Safety Assessment (PSA) related to prescription skills in eight competencies. A survey-based study was initiated to evaluate students' self-confidence.
methodsThe study included 101 medical students in two groups (respiratory tract infections, urinary infections/sexually transmitted diseases) in 2020-2023. Students were required to take BPS-PSA, prepare personal formularies and prove their ability to manage simulated patients in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) settings. A 15-item PSA-invigilated paper with an eight-item practice paper was explicitly prepared by BPS to match indications, tailored according to local formularies and regulations. Self-efficacy surveys were filled out before, during and after completion of the programme. Survey results were analysed concurrently with OSCE and BPS-PSA performances.
resultsThe number of students and gender distributions were similar in all groups. Average final grades ranged from 74-82 points for OSCE, and 43-59 for BPS-PSA. All groups did well in OSCE (92.1% aggregate pass rate). Survey results showed significant increase in self-efficacy levels measured at different task categories as the training progressed. The highest scores in PSA were for dose calculation (88.3%) and lowest for communication (33.01%).
conclusionsImplementing the PSA to WHO 6-step model provided complete assessment of learning environment and student progress. The new teaching programme supports students in developing their prescribing skills, allowing benchmarking in an international 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.