ArticleBMC medical education2025
Developing consensus on the competency and assessment of pharmacist preceptors.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPharmacist preceptors facilitate the professional development of students and interns during preregistration training. Evaluating preceptor competency is essential for ensuring the quality and consistency of the training process. For effective evaluation to occur, consensus is needed to establish which preceptor competencies require assessment as well as the method of assessment and who should perform the assessment.
methodsThe Delphi method was used to develop a consensus among experts in pharmacy education, accreditation, and practice settings. The study involved three rounds of anonymous surveys in REDCap, focusing on the necessity, feasibility, and methods of assessing preceptor competencies. A previous literature review identified 16 evidence-based competencies that formed the basis of the survey. An agreement level of 70% was set as the threshold for consensus.
resultsAmong the 59 invited experts, 22 completed the first round, 13 completed the second round, and eight completed the last round. Consensus was achieved on 17 competencies, with 16 deemed feasible to assess. Eight were considered mandatory for assessment, and four were preferable. Consensus on assessment methods and suitable assessors was achieved for these patients. Four competencies were feasible to assess but lacked consensus on the method or assessor. A multimodal assessment approach, including preceptee surveys, self-assessments, and peer observations, was identified as suitable.
conclusionsUsing a Delphi consensus method, by expert opinion, our study supports the perceived feasibility of assessing pharmacy preceptor competencies via a multimodal approach and clarifies who should assess each competency and how. Implementing these assessments can enhance preceptorship quality, facilitating consistent experiential placements for preceptees. The incorporation of preceptor assessment into accreditation standards should be considered essential to promote high-quality preceptorship and support the ongoing professional development of preceptors.
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.