ReviewPharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility in Pharmacy Education: A Scoping Review.
Review in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Preparing pharmacists to serve diverse populations requires a meaningful integration of equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility (EDIA) within pharmacy education, yet such integration remains uneven and insufficiently understood. This scoping review aimed to examine how EDIA is addressed across faculty development, curriculum content, and teaching strategies in pharmacy education. Following the guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute, we searched six databases (Embase, Medline, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, and Web of Science) for studies published between 2014 and 2025. After screening 3031 records, 86 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies focused on curriculum (48/86) and teaching strategies (35/86), while very few examined faculty development (3/86). Research was heavily concentrated in the United States of America and relied predominantly on survey-based methods. EDIA topics were often addressed in isolation with a strong emphasis on intercultural communication and limited attention to areas such as disability, migration, and socioeconomic status. Intersectional approaches were rare. Overall, EDIA in pharmacy education appears fragmented and commonly implemented as standalone initiatives rather than integrated across programs. These findings highlight important gaps in faculty development in pharmacy education, methodological diversity, and global representation, and they point to persistent structural gaps and the need to strengthen faculty development initiatives specific to pharmacy education and to move beyond isolated initiatives toward a sustained, program-level integration of EDIA.
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.