Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41701302›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2026

Exploring the applicability of the UK Prescribing Safety Assessment with early career pharmacists as preparation before formal prescribing training.

Fiona McMillan, Judy Wakeling, Jackie Inch, Leon Zlotos, Simon Maxwell, Scott Cunningham, Anne Boyter, Ailsa Power

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Fiona McMillanNHS Education for Scotland GB, Edinburgh, UK.
Judy WakelingNHS Education for Scotland GB, Edinburgh, UK. Judy.Wakeling@nhs.scot.
Jackie InchNHS Education for Scotland GB, Edinburgh, UK.
Leon ZlotosNHS Education for Scotland GB, Edinburgh, UK.
Simon MaxwellUniversity of Edinburgh GB, Edinburgh, UK.
Scott CunninghamUniversity of New South Wales AU, Kensington, Australia.
Anne BoyterUniversity of Strathclyde GB, Glasgow, UK.
Ailsa PowerNHS Education for Scotland GB, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEvidence shows that non-medical prescribing is as effective as medical prescribing in a range of acute and chronic conditions and is well accepted by a diverse range of key stakeholders. Pharmacists in the UK are set to acquire prescribing skills at an earlier stage in their training, with prescribing integrated into the first five years of training and the ability to prescribe from the point of registration from August 2026. Therefore, reliable and reproducible methods of assessing their ability to prescribe safely need to be in place. The UK Prescribing Safety Assessment (PSA) could be a standard method to assess prescribing skills across professions.

aimTo examine the performance of post-registration Foundation pharmacists in the PSA and to explore their views on its suitability as a development tool before enrolling on an independent prescribing (IP) course.

methodPharmacists in Scotland 12 months into the post-registration Foundation programme were invited to sit a 30-question, blueprint-aligned online PSA in September 2024. Mean scores and facility scores were determined. (Facility is a measurement of how easy a question is: higher facility index = question is considered easier; lower facility index = question is considered more difficult). An online evaluation questionnaire gathered feedback on content and appropriateness, analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsSeventy-one of 128 (55.5%) eligible pharmacists sat the PSA; mean total score was 72.5% (SD 10.2). Domain-level mean scores (facility) were: Prescription Review 13.51/16 (0.84); Providing Information 4.96/6 (0.83); Dose Calculations 6.85/8 (0.86); Adverse Drug Reactions 6.51/8 (0.81); Drug Monitoring 5.61/8 (0.70); Planning Management 5.01/8 (0.63); Data Interpretation 3.41/6 (0.57); Prescription Writing 26.62/40 (0.67). The questionnaire was completed by 16/71 (22.5%) PSA sitters: most agreed the assessment was appropriate for their stage and helpful preparation for an IP course; some community pharmacists considered hospital-based content less relevant.

conclusionFormative participation in the UK PSA by post-registration Foundation pharmacists provided domain-level performance data and was regarded by respondents as useful preparation for an IP course. Findings suggest potential value in situating the PSA during the Foundation Training Year, with consideration of sector relevance and targeted support for domains such as prescription writing and data interpretation.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceDrug PrescriptionsPharmacistsHumansNon-Medical PrescribingPatient SafetyPractice Patterns, Pharmacists'ScotlandSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomClinical competenceDrugEducationGraduatePatient safetyPharmacistsPharmacyPrescriptionsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID41701302
PMCPMC13176045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.