Development and validation of a scale to measure patients’ trust in pharmacists in Singapore

Objective: To develop and validate a scale to measure patients’ trust in pharmacists for use as an outcomes predictor in pharmacoeconomic and pharmaceutical care studies. Methods: Literature review, study team discussion and focus group discussions were conducted to generate items of a candidate version to be pilot-tested for content validity. An amended candidate version was then tested among eligible Singaporeans across different ethnic and age groups. Score distributions were assessed for discriminatory power and item analyses for fi nalizing items. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify dimensionality and homogeneous items. Cronbach’s alpha was measured for internal consistency and Pearson’s correlation coefficients for convergent validity. Results: Eighteen items were generated with good variability (SD ≻ 1.0) and symmetry (means ranged from −1 to 1) for score distribution. After minor changes to improve content clarity, the amended questionnaire was self-administered among 1196 respondents [mean (SD) age: 38.6 (14.9) years, 51.6% female, 87% ≻6 years of education]. Six items were dropped due to inadequate item-total correlation coefficients, leaving 12-item scale for factor analysis. Three factors (“benevolence”, “technical competence” and “global trust”) were identifi ed, accounting for 55% of the total variance. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.83, indicating high internal consistency. Convergent validity was demonstrated by statistically signifi cant positive correlations between trust and patients’ satisfaction with pharmacists’ service (r = 0.54), returning for care (r = 0.30) and preference of medical decision-making pattern (r = 0.16). Conclusion: The 12-item trust in pharmacists scale demonstrated high reliability and convergent validity. Further studies among other populations are suggested to confi rm the robustness and even improve the current scale

Factors affecting consumers' decisions on the use of nutraceuticals: a systematic review

There is a high and increasing global prevalence of nutraceuticals use. This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise all available evidence to identify the factors affecting consumers’ decisions in taking nutraceuticals. Questionnaire, interview or focus group studies which directly reported factors affecting consumers’ decisions in using nutraceuticals were included. A thematic synthesis method was employed to synthesis the findings from the included studies. Out of the 76 studies included, the key factors identified as the most important factors motivating consumers to take nutraceuticals were the perceived health benefits and safety of nutraceuticals, as well as the advice from healthcare professionals, friends and family. The identified barriers to take nutraceuticals were a lack of belief in the health benefit of nutraceuticals, the high cost of nutraceuticals and consumers’ lack of knowledge about nutraceuticals. As a chief course of recommendation for the use of nutraceuticals, healthcare professionals should strive to utilise reliable information from clinical evidence to help consumers in making an informed decision in using nutraceuticals. Future studies should explore the possible ways to improve channelling clinical evidence information of nutraceuticals to the public

The Value of Honors: A Study of Alumni Perspectives on Skills Gained Through Honors Education

Honors education is often marketed as a means to offer enhanced value to a collegiate education. This value has the capacity to bolster a student’s academic experience, to add to his or her comprehensive skill set, to enhance a resumé, and to improve professional development. Ernest Pascarella argued that theoretical value without data is often used to justify collegiate programs such as honors and criticized those practices for lacking research and data to validate the claim of enhanced value. The current research was designed to obtain validation by eliciting the perspectives of alumni from South Dakota State University’s (SDSU’s) Honors College on the value of their honors education. The data presented here sought to fill a gap in honors research by identifying what skills honors graduates value from their honors education and determining whether post-graduation value aligns with the SDSU Honors College’s student learning outcomes. Assessing the effectiveness and value of honors education is a challenge, heightened by the fact that no two honors programs are exactly alike. However, there have been attempts dating back at least as early as 1995 to assess the value of honors education. Among these attempts are studies on grade point average (GPA), student involvement, exposure to collegiate “good practices,” student awards, and measures of emotional intelligence among honors students. These studies have largely been conducted with undergraduate students in an attempt to justify the value of an honors education, but these previous studies can help scholars assess where future research is needed

Methodological approaches for assessing certainty of the evidence in umbrella reviews: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION: The number of umbrella reviews (URs) that compiled systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR-MAs) has increased dramatically over recent years. No formal guidance for assessing the certainty of evidence in URs of meta-analyses exists nowadays. URs of non-interventional studies help establish evidence linking exposure to certain health outcomes in a population. This study aims to identify and describe the methodological approaches for assessing the certainty of the evidence in published URs of non-interventions. METHODS: We searched from 3 databases including PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library from May 2010 to September 2021. We included URs that included SR-MAs of studies with non-interventions. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. We compared URs characteristics stratified by publication year, journal ranking, journal impact factor using Chi-square test. RESULTS: Ninety-nine URs have been included. Most were SR-MAs of observational studies evaluating association of non-modifiable risk factors with some outcomes. Only half (56.6%) of the included URs assessed the certainty of the evidence. The most frequently used criteria is credibility assessment (80.4%), followed by GRADE approach (14.3%). URs published in journals with higher journal impact factor assessed certainty of evidence than URs published in lower impact group (77.1 versus 37.2% respectively, p < 0.05). However, criteria for credibility assessment used in four of the seven URs that were published in top ranking journals were slightly varied. CONCLUSIONS: Half of URs of MAs of non-interventional studies have assessed the certainty of the evidence, in which criteria for credibility assessment was the commonly used method. Guidance and standards are required to ensure the methodological rigor and consistency of certainty of evidence assessment for URs

Evaluating Student Performance and Perception of a Workshop Integrating Pharmacy Practice and a Pharmaceutics Lab

&nbsp; Objective: Evaluating Student Performance and Perception of a Workshop Integrating Pharmacy Practice and a Pharmaceutics Lab Innovation: Common methods for curricular integration are often time and faculty-intensive. An innovative approach to integration was developed and utilized in an introductory compounding workshop. Faculty members collaborated with a compounding pharmacist to design and facilitate a pharmaceutics workshop for first-year pharmacy students.&nbsp; The workshop was composed of four major sections, an introduction to pharmaceutical compounding and the regulations surrounding manufacturing and sterility, a case discussion involving a pediatric patient and the need to develop an appropriate drug delivery system, a short review of pharmaceutical calculations and labeling requirements, and then an introduction to logistics and active learning in a lab setting. Critical Analysis: After taking part in the workshop, students indicated a significantly higher comfort level going into the pharmaceutics lab (3.48±0.83 to 4.04±0.70) and in the compounding process (3.06±0.83 to 3.71±0.80). Their views of the clinical application of the lab and the need to use knowledge gained from other courses in the lab were also significantly improved (4.36±0.68 to 4.61±0.49 and 3.71±0.77 to 4.26±0.74, respectively). In addition, their perceptions of how they will utilize the skills developed as a practicing pharmacist, and their feelings towards the safety procedures involved in compounding, were also positively affected (3.96±0.87 to 4.45±0.59 and 3.28±0.92 to 3.91±0.72, respectively). Finally, students’ average quiz score in Spring 2016, when the workshop was instituted, significantly increased from Spring 2015 (90.154±4.98 versus 85.89±10.87, respectively). Article Type:&nbsp; Not

Methodological approaches for assessing certainty of the evidence in umbrella reviews: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION: The number of umbrella reviews (URs) that compiled systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR-MAs) has increased dramatically over recent years. No formal guidance for assessing the certainty of evidence in URs of meta-analyses exists nowadays. URs of non-interventional studies help establish evidence linking exposure to certain health outcomes in a population. This study aims to identify and describe the methodological approaches for assessing the certainty of the evidence in published URs of non-interventions. METHODS: We searched from 3 databases including PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library from May 2010 to September 2021. We included URs that included SR-MAs of studies with non-interventions. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. We compared URs characteristics stratified by publication year, journal ranking, journal impact factor using Chi-square test. RESULTS: Ninety-nine URs have been included. Most were SR-MAs of observational studies evaluating association of non-modifiable risk factors with some outcomes. Only half (56.6%) of the included URs assessed the certainty of the evidence. The most frequently used criteria is credibility assessment (80.4%), followed by GRADE approach (14.3%). URs published in journals with higher journal impact factor assessed certainty of evidence than URs published in lower impact group (77.1 versus 37.2% respectively, p < 0.05). However, criteria for credibility assessment used in four of the seven URs that were published in top ranking journals were slightly varied. CONCLUSIONS: Half of URs of MAs of non-interventional studies have assessed the certainty of the evidence, in which criteria for credibility assessment was the commonly used method. Guidance and standards are required to ensure the methodological rigor and consistency of certainty of evidence assessment for URs

The Value of Honors: A Study of Alumni Perspectives on Skills Gained Through Honors Education

Honors education is often marketed as a means to offer enhanced value to a collegiate education. This value has the capacity to bolster a student’s academic experience, to add to his or her comprehensive skill set, to enhance a resumé, and to improve professional development. Ernest Pascarella argued that theoretical value without data is often used to justify collegiate programs such as honors and criticized those practices for lacking research and data to validate the claim of enhanced value. The current research was designed to obtain validation by eliciting the perspectives of alumni from South Dakota State University’s (SDSU’s) Honors College on the value of their honors education. The data presented here sought to fill a gap in honors research by identifying what skills honors graduates value from their honors education and determining whether post-graduation value aligns with the SDSU Honors College’s student learning outcomes. Assessing the effectiveness and value of honors education is a challenge, heightened by the fact that no two honors programs are exactly alike. However, there have been attempts dating back at least as early as 1995 to assess the value of honors education. Among these attempts are studies on grade point average (GPA), student involvement, exposure to collegiate “good practices,” student awards, and measures of emotional intelligence among honors students. These studies have largely been conducted with undergraduate students in an attempt to justify the value of an honors education, but these previous studies can help scholars assess where future research is needed