ArticleJMIR medical education2026
Prescription Support Practice for Pharmacy Students: Pre-Post Educational Intervention Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring how interprofessional forces shape population-health competencies for clinical pharmacy trainees.Frontiers in 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the field of team-based care, pharmacists are vital for optimizing medication therapy. However, many medical professionals lack the opportunity to learn how to propose prescription changes with precision. Objective: This study aimed to address this knowledge gap by developing and assessing a new educational program for pharmacy students focused on prescription support and interprofessional collaboration. Methods: We recruited 191 fifth-year pharmaceutical students during the 2022-2024 academic years. The program featured a 7-day intensive curriculum that included learning how to assist with prescriptions, analyzing clinical data, and engaging in role-playing exercises. A web-based questionnaire and a paper test were used to evaluate students' awareness and knowledge both before and after the program. Statistical analyses were performed to verify the significance of changes; we utilized the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for the ordinal data derived from the specific behavioral objectives and 2-tailed paired t tests for the interval data from the knowledge tests. The magnitude of change was quantified using r for Wilcoxon tests and Cohen dz for 2-tailed t tests, with 95% CI calculated to ensure the stability and reliability of the observed results. Results: Analysis of the primary outcome specific behavioral objectives revealed statistically significant effects across all items (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; P<.001). Effect sizes (r=0.505-0.835) ranged from moderate to large, with particularly large effects observed in identifying contents issue (r=0.835, 95% CI 0.126-0.330; P<.001). Knowledge test scores showed significant improvement in the following 3 subjects: pharmacology (r=-0.504, 95% CI -0.215 to 0.127; P<.001), organic chemistry (r=0.254, 95% CI -0.148 to -0.193; P=.004), and communication (r=0.221, 95% CI -0.151 to -0.190; P=.01). No significant changes were observed in pathology or pharmacokinetics. Conclusions: This program provides strong evidence that practical, hands-on learning with hospital pharmacists helps improve pharmacy students' professional skills and optimize pharmaceutical therapies in interprofessional care. By teaching pharmacists to effectively propose prescription changes, the program equips them to become integral members of interprofessional care, ultimately leading to optimized pharmaceutical care for patients.
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.