ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Fostering medication review competence of pharmacy students: An assessment by students and their preceptors after advanced-level practical internship.
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 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.
- A mixed-methods study on the effectiveness and optimization needs of a prescription review training program: from the KAP perspective of returning trainees.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Fostering medication review competence of pharmacy students: An assessment by students and their preceptors after advanced-level practical internship.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe aim of this study was to introduce a new assessment method for pharmacy students' real-life competence in reviewing medications after obligatory advanced-level practical internship in Finland.
methodsThe new medication review (MR) competence assessment method consisted of (1) a self-assessment by pharmacy students and (2) a performance assessment by their MR specialized preceptors at the completion of the advanced-level pharmacy internship during the third study year at the University of Helsinki, Finland. The assessment applied a structured and validated electronic evaluation tool based on national MR competence recommendations for pharmacists (31 items).
resultsAltogether 378 students and their MR preceptors assessed students' MR competence during the period of November 2020-December 2023. Majority of the students self-assessed their MR competence as very good (25%) or good (70%). Preceptors' estimates for students' MR competence were higher, as they graded 54% of the students with the grade very good and 43% with the grade good. Differences between students' and preceptors' assessments were statistically significant (p < .05) in all other statements except for 'Understands the importance of medication reconciliation and prescription review in improving medication safety and outcomes' (p = .829). The preceptors tended to assess students' MR competence as better than students themselves.
conclusionsCombining self-assessment and assessment by an MR specialized preceptor forms a feasible method for assessing the real-life MR competence of students after advanced-level pharmacy internship. The involvement of the students' and preceptors' assessments can balance the effect of over- and under-estimation of the competence.
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.