Development and validation of a performance-based palliative care assessment tool for student pharmacists
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, ISSN: 1877-1297, Vol: 16, Issue: 1, Page: 39-48
2024
- 12Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures12
- Readers12
- 12
Article Description
Integration of hospice and palliative care principles within pharmacy curricula is essential to fill the need of pharmacist training in this growing specialty. A formalized assessment tool to evaluate skill development does not exist for student pharmacists specific to palliative care. The objective of this study was to develop a valid and reliable, palliative care-focused, performance-based assessment tool for student pharmacists. Eight academic palliative care (PC) pharmacists were recruited for the workgroup to perform domain development, validation, tool creation, and reliability testing for this performance-based assessment tool. Hospice and palliative care clinical pharmacist entrustable professional activities (EPAs) served as the framework. Content validity testing utilized content validity index and scale universal agreement (S-CVI/UA) to determine level of agreement for activities included in the tool. Student volunteers completed a standardized patient case and workgroup members served as raters during the reliability testing phase. Interrater reliability was measured through calculation of Fleiss Kappa scores for each activity. Out of 14 EPAs, nine were deemed “essential” to include in the tool. Thirty-four supporting activities for the nine essential EPAs were drafted. Two rounds of content validity testing were necessary to achieve S-CVI/UA of 0.9593. Consensus was reached from workgroup members for activities deemed necessary to include in the tool after questionnaire distribution utilizing a Fleiss Kappa cutoff >0.6. This validated tool will afford colleges and schools of pharmacy with PC curricula an opportunity to assess student achievement of PC-specific skills and evaluate curricular effectiveness.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877129723003076; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2023.12.003; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85181249327&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38158329; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877129723003076; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2023.12.003
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know