ArticleBMC medical education2026
Characterization of the learning environment for teaching pharmaceutical care: a scoping review.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLearning environments encompass aspects related to personal, social, organizational, physical, and virtual components and can affect not only academic performance but also the physical and emotional well-being of students, which in turn impacts the quality of services offered to society. Therefore, this study aimed to characterize the learning environment for pharmaceutical care teaching in the literature.
findingsA scoping review was conducted the databases: Pubmed (Medline), Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and ERIC. The search was conducted in July 2025, without restrictions of year or language. The methodological quality of studies was verified using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). 11 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this scoping review. They were published between 2010 and 2025, in the United States (n = 4), Malaysia (n = 2; 18.18%), Netherlands, Australia, United Kingdom, Kuwait, and Canada (n = 1; 9.09%). The target population was Pharmacy students. Physical and virtual environments were described, highlighting innovative approaches centered on the student, as follows: experience-based learning (EBL), problem-based learning (PBL), simulation, team-based learning, blended learning and online learning (e-learning). Personal, social, and organizational components were also identified. Innovative strategies have proven effective in the learning process of pharmaceutical care. However, it is important that these findings be reproducible in settings both inside and outside the university. Future research should deepen the understanding of learning environments for teaching Pharmaceutical Care to strengthen scientific production and guide the training of future pharmacists better prepared for patient-centered 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.