No abstract

RTS,S has demonstrated efficacy and safety in Phase 1, 2, and 3 trials, and has the potential to decrease morbidity and mortality from malaria worldwide. Major challenges include determination of the duration of immunity, assessment of its cost-effectiveness, its use in special populations, and its dissemination in endemic regions. Pending further studies, RTS,S has the potential to become the benchmark as the first effective vaccine against malaria.

Objective. To report the findings of how Canadian preceptors perceive and subsequently evaluate diverse levels of trainees during pharmacy clerkships. Methods. Using modified Delphi technique, 17 Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) preceptors from across Canada categorized 16 student narrative descriptions pertaining to their perception of described student performance: exceeds, meets, or falls below their expectations. Results. Twelve (75%) student narratives profiles were categorized unanimously in the final round, six of which were below expectations. Out of 117 ratings of below expectations by responding preceptors, the majority (115, 98%) of post-baccalaureate PharmD students described would fail. Conversely, if the same narrative instead profiled a resident or an entry-to-practice PharmD student, rotation failure decreased to 95 (81%) and 89 (76%), respectively. Conclusion. Pharmacy preceptors do not uniformly judge the same described student performance and inconsistently apply failing rotation grades when they do agree that performance falls below expectations.

Background Critical appraisal aids in assessing the quality of scientific literature, which is central to the practice of evidence-based medicine. Several tools and guidelines are available for critiquing and assessing the quality of specific study types. However, limited guidance exists for critical appraisal of clinical pharmacokinetic studies. Aim We aimed to achieve experts’ consensus regarding the quality markers for clinical pharmacokinetic studies in an attempt to develop a critical appraisal tool. Method Quality markers related to clinical pharmacokinetic studies, were derived from the published literature and categorized according to manuscript reporting domains (abstract, introduction/background, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion). Questions that aid in appraising pharmacokinetic studies were formulated from these quality markers. Experts were involved in a modified Delphi process to achieve a consensus regarding the formulated questions. The proposed tool was pilot tested on 30 recently published clinical pharmacokinetic studies. Inter-observer agreement was measured to determine the reliability of the included items. Results Twenty-five experts consented to participate. Three rounds of a modified Delphi survey were required to generate a consensus for a 21-item tool aimed at appraising the quality of clinical pharmacokinetic studies. When applied to 30 recently published clinical pharmacokinetic studies, most items scored fair to moderate levels of agreement (61.90–95.24%). Conclusions The clinical pharmacokinetic critical appraisal tool (CACPK) developed in this study consisted of 21 items aimed at helping an end-user to determine the quality of a pharmacokinetic study. Further studies are warranted to reaffirm the validity and reliability of the CACPK tool.

Objective. To determine student and alumni perceptions of a Canadian-based pharmacy degree accreditation in a Middle Eastern setting and to explore the impact on patient care practices. Methods. Current and former Doctor of Pharmacy students from Qatar University were recruited to participate in the study. Three focus groups were conducted with a total of 14 participants (39% of total population). Focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using a bottom-up, grounded theory approach to identify overarching themes related to the study objectives. Results. Data analysis of participants' comments revealed three key themes regarding university accreditation by an international organization: influence on education, influence on patient care, and influence on the individual. Overall, participants responded positively toward international accreditation, as it was perceived to ensure the quality of education by meeting international standards, improve patient care through clinical training, and provide greater individual career opportunities through reputability. Participants responded negatively toward some aspects of accreditation: it was perceived to increase student workload, lacked recognition and did not result in differentiation in job-related duties, and was perceived to be the reason for training gaps related to culture and language within the accredited curriculum. Conclusion. Participants perceived international accreditation positively for its influence on education and patient care; however, some misconceptions and negative perceptions existed regarding its influence on the individual practitioner.