Potential of Nationwide Sharing of a Unified Progress Check
Introduction
The pharmacy schooling within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has witnessed an exponential enlargement since 2001. This was as a result of authorities initiative to coach extra pharmacists as a way to meet the nationwide wants and the calls for of the rising inhabitants of the nation. Presently, there are 22 authorities schools of pharmacy along with seven personal schools.1 All of those schools are providing Physician of Pharmacy (Pharm.D.) program and some of them are nonetheless providing a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) in pharmacy.
With the intention to preserve prime quality schooling and for accreditation functions, the Saudi Schooling and Coaching Analysis Fee (ETEC) and thru its affiliated Nationwide Middle for Educational Accreditation and evAluation (NCAAA) has developed the Saudi Arabian Qualification Framework (SAQF) which is a doc that integrates schooling, coaching and employment in a unified system. All academic establishments within the KSA need to register as establishments in addition to their {qualifications}/packages that they provide on a set of requirements supplied by this doc. That is the primary and obligatory step for establishment and program accreditation. There are units of requirements for the establishment and for this system.2 SAQF additionally offers the domains for program studying outcomes (PLOs) and these are categorized into information, abilities and competence. The competence area covers the areas of autonomy and accountability, observe, and attributes. Every explicit Pharm.D. program has a set of PLOs to fulfill these domains, and consequently, the course studying outcomes (CLOs) for every course within the curriculum need to be logically mapped to this system’s PLOs. Below the above talked about domains, the universities of pharmacy among the many KSA share a unified set of 18 PLOs for his or her Pharm.D. packages.
With this improve within the variety of schools of pharmacy, there’s a essential want for sustaining high quality assurance of their packages which is able to serve to offer data for all stakeholders to enhance curricula and work on school and facility enhancement.3 This requires using evaluation instruments that may consider studying of scholars and harmonize the information and abilities gained from such packages at totally different establishments.4 Summative evaluation has been historically used as a standard strategy for evaluation of studying and to guarantee competence of pharmacy graduates for exterior stakeholders.5 These days, the influence of formative evaluation on college students’ studying has been acknowledged by educators.6,7 The progress take a look at is an strategy that has been proven to be efficient for the aim of each formative and summative evaluation of scholar achievement. It’s a technique of longitudinal evaluation that may be periodically utilized to all college students of this system and it’s anticipated {that a} progressive share of their solutions will probably be proper.8,9 The progress take a look at can serve to measure deep and extended time period studying of scholars. As well as, it might probably permit early detection of underperformance of some college students.10 The Universities of Maastricht and Missouri had been the primary to develop and introduce the progress take a look at again within the Seventies.11,12 Since then, it has been practiced in numerous well being care packages on this planet with extra emphasis in drugs. Subsequently, the progress take a look at can be utilized to function a formative evaluation software for the achievement of scholars and likewise for analysis of the curriculum.13
There’s a Council of Deans for all the universities of pharmacy within the KSA that’s composed from all of the deans of those schools and periodically chaired by one in every of them. Briefly, the operate of this council is to implement strategic planning for the universities of pharmacy and to foster cooperation on all issues associated to the career of pharmacy in regards to the variety of pharmacy graduates and their potential work alternatives. Previously educational 12 months (2020–2021), the Council of Deans selected an initiative to manage a unified progress take a look at for all of the undergraduate college students enrolled in these schools. The take a look at was meant to focus on all scholar inhabitants in every school and in all ranges of the skilled program, ie, skilled 12 months 1 (P1) to skilled 12 months 4 (P4). It has been agreed to conduct the take a look at yearly thereafter for the aim of analysis of scholars and curricula, and as well as, it’s going to function a dependable software for benchmarking for use for accreditation utility.
The purpose of this examine is to report on the utilization of an annual progress take a look at for pharmacy college students within the KSA in addition to presenting the outcomes of the take a look at for the tutorial 12 months (2020–2021) as a way to consider the efficiency of scholars at totally different ranges in this system.
Methodology and Design
Rationale
Though the present Pharm.D. packages’ curricula are based mostly on competency schooling on this subject, there are nonetheless challenges within the evaluation of the scholars and curricula that haven’t been but absolutely resolved. Subsequently, it’s price learning the contribution of a unified progress take a look at, in a big variety of pharmacy schools, to the evaluation of data and abilities gained and retained by the scholars over time in addition to figuring out particular areas of concern within the curriculum which will want re-evaluation and enchancment.
Examine Design
This process was led by the Faculty of Pharmacy (COP) at King Saud bin Abdulaziz College for Well being Sciences (KSAU-HS) in Riyadh, KSA. Initially, the variety of schools keen to take part within the take a look at was recognized. It was requested from every school’s Dean to instruct the school members, in line with their specialties, to arrange and submit a minimal of 30 questions within the areas of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and one other 50 inquiries to cowl the areas of pharmacy observe. The query objects had been made up of a number of selection questions (MCQs) with 4 response choices for every and need to be mapped to the PLOs. The MCQs collected from all schools had been reviewed by a panel of college members in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe to satisfy a specified inclusion standards after which saved in a query financial institution for this function. Based mostly on the inclusion/exclusion standards talked about beneath, the whole variety of questions entered within the query financial institution was 472 with a median of three–4 questions mapped to every PLO. To make sure balanced distribution of questions over the 18 unified PLOs, 2–3 MCQs had been chosen to evaluate every PLO by measuring the typical share of scholars’ correct responses on these questions. Since abilities and competences can’t be evaluated by MCQs, we used questions kind of MCQs that may measure cognitive abilities, utility of pointers and competences related information. The take a look at was ready by deciding on questions from this query financial institution the place it was composed of 100 MCQs; 30% of which cowl fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and the remaining 70% cowl totally different areas in pharmacy observe. The take a look at was designed to be administered over a interval of two hours.
The take a look at was performed throughout week 11 of the primary semester of the tutorial 12 months 2020–2021. A unified date and time have been set throughout that week to be probably the most handy for all college students of all batches and to have them obtainable for a 2 hour interval to take the take a look at. The date and time had been introduced for the scholars throughout that week and that was simply 2 days upfront earlier than the date of the take a look at. They had been additionally knowledgeable that attendance is obligatory they usually simply need to take the take a look at with none prior preparation or learning. The take a look at was given on-line in all collaborating schools and the scholars had been knowledgeable find out how to entry the take a look at on the required time. Goal college students had been solely the scholars enrolled within the skilled program. For the aim of reporting the outcomes, schools will probably be recognized by codes (C1-C15) with out disclosing the title of the faculty and the college. No overview or approval was required for this examine by the IRB because it doesn’t contain experimenting on human or taking any organic samples from the members.
Inclusion Standards
A query merchandise was accepted within the query financial institution whether it is:
-Within the type of MCQ.
-Clearly addressing a selected subject in both fundamental pharmaceutical sciences or pharmacy observe.
-Logically mapped to a number of PLOs.
Exclusion Standards
A query merchandise was rejected and never entered within the query financial institution beneath a number of of the next circumstances:
-Not within the type of MCQ
-Imprecise with out clear identification of the subject to be addressed
-Not mapped to a number of PLOs
-Response choices much less or greater than 4
-MCQs with responses like “All the above” or “Not one of the above”
Statistical Evaluation
Descriptive statistics have been utilized wherever acceptable to calculate the quantity and p.c for categorical variables along with the imply and normal deviation for steady variables together with one-way evaluation of variance (ANOVA) to find out the extent of significance. A linear regression mannequin was constructed to search out the correlation coefficient and a 95% confidence interval (CI) in an try to research if there’s a vital correlation between the scholars’ common cumulative grade level common (cGPA) and their imply scores within the progress take a look at. The Pearson correlation coefficient with its p-values for every batch of scholars had been calculated and a p-value < 0.05 is to be thought of vital.
Outcomes
Fifteen schools agreed to take part within the progress take a look at out of the 22 authorities schools within the kingdom. Desk 1 reveals a abstract of those schools’ packages, their variety of enrolled college students in this system and the variety of college students attended the take a look at. Pharm.D. packages are provided in 11 of those schools whereas 2 are providing Pharm.D and B.Sc. packages on the similar time. Nonetheless, the B.Sc. program is in its last 12 months of phasing out in one in every of these schools (C12) the place solely 3 B.Sc. college students attended the take a look at out of a complete of 431 which is insignificant. Thus, schools C1 – C12 are thought of as the universities that supply Pharm.D. program solely. Faculty C13 affords a B.Sc. program and simply began a Pharm.D. program, and subsequently, it is going to be handled as one of many schools that supply B.Sc. program. There are 2 schools which are nonetheless providing B.Sc. packages solely (C14 and C15). Thus, schools C13 – C15 are thought of as the universities that supply B.Sc. program solely.
 |
Desk 1 Program(s) Supplied by Every Collaborating Faculty, the Complete Variety of Enrolled College students and the Variety of College students Attended the Progress Check |
The full variety of college students enrolled in all of those collaborating schools is 5364 and the whole variety of college students who attended the take a look at was 4321. This means an total attendance price of about 80%. Desk 1 additionally reveals the attendance share of scholars for every school. The attendance share was ranging between 59% to barely above 97%.
Determine 1 reveals the imply scores within the progress take a look at for female and male college students from every school. Faculty C9 affords Pharm.D. program for feminine college students solely whereas C14 affords B.Sc. program for male college students solely. Determine 2 reveals the imply scores of the scholars within the questions on fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe within the schools that supply Pharm.D. program solely (C1 – C12). Within the majority of the universities, the imply scores of the scholars in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences had been comparatively greater in comparison with their scores in pharmacy observe. The identical information was stratified for every skilled stage within the schools that supply Pharm.D. program as proven in Desk 2. The outcomes present a gradual improve within the imply scores of the scholars as they progress by way of the Pharm.D. program. Determine 3 additionally reveals the identical comparability, as whole imply scores, for the universities that supply B.Sc. program solely (C13 – C15) with an identical noticed pattern the place the imply scores are greater within the questions overlaying the areas of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences in comparison with disciplines of pharmacy observe. Determine 4 illustrates the whole imply scores for every skilled 12 months of the Pharm.D. college students. It has been computed as the whole mixed common scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe for every skilled 12 months within the Pharm.D. program of schools C1 – C12.
 |
Desk 2 Imply Scores (% ± SD) of College students within the Questions on Primary Pharmaceutical Sciences and Pharmacy Apply for Every Skilled Degree (P1 – P4) within the Faculties That Provide Pharm.D. Program |
 |
Determine 1 Imply scores (%) of all college students within the skilled packages as reported by the universities participated within the progress take a look at. |
 |
Determine 2 Imply scores (%) of scholars within the questions on fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe within the schools that supply Pharm.D. program. |
 |
Determine 3 Imply scores (%) of scholars within the questions on fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe within the schools that supply B.Sc. packages (Information on pharmacy observe questions weren’t reported by C14). |
 |
Determine 4 Mixed imply scores (%) of all college students within the skilled years (P1 – P4) of the Pharm.D. program for schools C1 – C12. |
Desk 3 summarizes the evaluation outcomes of the unified PLOs among the many schools of pharmacy within the KSA. The desk presents the evaluation outcomes for each Pharm.D. and B.Sc. college students based mostly on the progress take a look at outcomes obtained from the collaborating schools. Generally, and for each Pharm.D. and B.Sc. packages, it may be seen that the evaluation outcomes are greater within the domains of abilities and information in comparison with the area of competence with its sub-domains of autonomy and accountability, observe and attributes. For B.Sc. program specifically, it may be seen that the evaluation leads to the information and abilities domains are considerably greater in comparison with the competence area. As well as, their scores in competence area are considerably decrease compared to Pharm.D. college students. The evaluation consequence for every PLO has been calculated by computing the imply scores of the scholars in all questions which are mapped or linked to that exact PLO. Though the unified PLOs are designed for Pharm.D. program, these evaluation outcomes have been calculated based mostly on the progress take a look at outcomes for college kids enrolled in Pharm.D. program in addition to college students enrolled in B.Sc. program for the sake of comparability.
 |
Desk 3 Unified Program Studying Outcomes (PLOs) Among the many Faculties of Pharmacy within the KSA and Their Evaluation Based mostly on the College students’ Leads to the Progress Check for Each Pharm.D. and B.Sc. College students. The Final Column Exhibits the PLOs Evaluation Outcomes Based mostly Solely on the P4 (Pharm.D.) College students’ Scores |
The final column in Desk 3 summarizes the evaluation outcomes of the unified PLOs based mostly solely on the imply scores of the P4 Pharm.D. college students which is calculated as mixed outcomes from schools C1 – C12. It may be clearly noticed that there’s a gradual increment within the evaluation outcomes of the PLOs as we go to the competence area and its sub-domains. The scores of the P4 Pharm.D. college students in these PLOs are greater in comparison with the information and abilities domains.
Desk 4 reveals the outcomes of correlation between the typical cGPA of scholars in every skilled stage of the Pharm.D. program and their imply scores within the progress take a look at. The outcomes indicated no vital correlation because the CI for every stage could be very huge with p-values which are a lot greater than 0.05.
 |
Desk 4 Correlation Between the Common cGPA and Imply Scores within the Progress Check for Every Skilled Degree (P1 – P4) of College students within the Pharm.D. Program |
Dialogue
The full variety of college students who attended the progress take a look at was 4321 from all of the 15 pharmacy schools participated within the take a look at. This quantity contains Pharm.D. and B.Sc. college students and it constitutes a passable pattern dimension to attract conclusions based mostly on this take a look at. Faculty C12 has a B.Sc. program in its last 12 months of phasing out. The most important variety of college students who attended the take a look at from this faculty had been Pharm.D. college students with a complete of 428 college students. Faculty C13 has simply began a Pharm.D. program with solely 25 college students and nonetheless providing B.Sc. program with nearly all of college students are enrolled on this program. Subsequently, the info obtained from this faculty was solely thought of for B.Sc. program solely because the whole variety of its college students who attended the take a look at was 374 and solely 25 out of them had been Pharm.D. college students. Thus, for the aim of information remedy, schools C1 – C12 are recognized to supply Pharm.D. program and schools C13 – C15 are schools that supply B.Sc. program solely.
A comparability between the imply scores of female and male college students is proven in Determine 1. The male college students’ common rating was 40.75 ± 5.40 and the feminine college students’ common rating was 41.64 ± 5.61 and one-way single issue ANOVA confirmed a p-value = 0.314 indicating no vital distinction within the imply scores of each teams. Moreover, the connection between the genders confirmed a optimistic and really excessive correlation with a really excessive statistical significance. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) is 0.871 with a p-value = 0.0001. This additionally helps that the outcomes of female and male college students are extremely correlated and never considerably totally different from one another. Subsequently and for additional dialogue, the outcomes will probably be handled as mixed college students’ outcomes whatever the gender.
Within the majority of the universities that supply Pharm.D. program (C1 – C12), the imply scores of the scholars in space of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences had been comparatively greater in comparison with their imply scores within the questions addressing pharmacy observe disciplines (Determine 2). One-way single issue ANOVA confirmed a p-value = 0.0094 indicating a big distinction within the imply scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences in comparison with pharmacy observe. As well as, the typical of the imply scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences was 46.29 ± 8.92 whereas in pharmacy observe it was 36.57 ± 7.78. Detailed outcomes for every skilled 12 months within the Pharm.D. program in all schools as a mixed common ± SD are introduced in Desk 2 which reveals the identical pattern as noticed in Determine 2. The distinction within the imply scores of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe was statistically vital for P1 and P2 the place the p-values had been 0.011 and 0.018, respectively. Nonetheless, the p-values for P3 and P4 had been virtually near 0.05 indicating no vital distinction within the imply scores of those 2 skilled ranges in pharmaceutical sciences and pharmacy observe. An analogous pattern was additionally noticed with the B.Sc. college students (C13 – C15) as proven in Determine 3 the place the scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences are greater in comparison with pharmacy observe. The imply rating in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences was 57.30 ± 1.84 and in pharmacy observe 38.48 ± 6.60 with a p-value = 0.015 indicating a big distinction. This pattern might be referred to 2 elements. Firstly, the proportion of questions on fundamental pharmaceutical sciences within the take a look at was 30% and the remaining 70% of questions had been addressing totally different areas of pharmacy observe. It’s anticipated that P1 and P2 college students will rating higher in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences since they’re nonetheless learning these sciences within the first two years of the skilled program and they don’t seem to be but uncovered to medical and pharmacy observe programs. Secondly, the main ideas of the gained information and abilities from fundamental sciences programs are normally repeated and strengthened or re-emphasized throughout all of the skilled years of this system. An analogous pattern has been noticed in a examine in contrast the scholars’ information and abilities in pharmacology and pharmacotherapy.14 This pattern can also be anticipated in schools that supply B.Sc. program as the first focus of the curriculum is principally on fundamental pharmaceutical sciences in such a program. This pattern is evident for the universities that supply B.Sc. program (Determine 3). One other subject that may also be addressed right here, and in relation to decrease scores within the areas of pharmacy observe, is that the take a look at was solely based mostly on MCQs. In observe and throughout the progress of the scholars within the skilled program, the educational outcomes which are primarily associated to competence domains are normally evaluated and assessed by many different evaluation instruments like assignments, case and subject discussions, analysis tasks, seminars and college students’ portfolios throughout medical rotations. Some packages even make the most of extra evaluation instruments like Goal Structured Sensible Examination (OSPE) and Goal Structured Scientific Examination (OSCE). Thus, inclusion of all these instruments in a progress take a look at will probably be tough and tedious to be executed.
Investigating the general outcomes of the scholars indicated that there was a transparent increment within the imply scores from P1 to P4 amongst all collaborating schools. It confirmed that P1 imply scores the place the bottom and P4 imply scores the place the very best as illustrated in Determine 4. This means progress and upkeep of the gained information and abilities of the scholars by way of the years of education within the skilled program. Additional investigation of the general outcomes introduced in Determine 4 confirmed that by wanting on the imply scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences and by making use of ANOVA that the p-value is 0.0665 which signifies no vital distinction between the skilled ranges (P1-P4). Related investigation of the imply scores in pharmacy observe gave a p-value of 0.00053 which signifies a big distinction between the skilled ranges of the scholars. This helps the remark that scholar gained information and abilities in pharmacy observe develop and enhance considerably throughout their development within the Pharm.D. curriculum whereas they preserve related stage of data and abilities in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences all through this system.
The evaluation of the unified PLOs among the many collaborating schools (Desk 3) confirmed a comparatively greater scores within the questions addressing the domains of data and abilities in comparison with the competence area. That is per the pattern noticed with greater scores in fundamental pharmaceutical sciences. It’s recognized that the educational outcomes of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences programs usually tend to be mapped to the domains of data and abilities reasonably than competence which is normally extra associated to greater medical programs and experiential coaching. Once more, this additionally might be attributed to repeating and emphasizing the essential ideas associated to information and abilities throughout all ranges of the skilled program. As proven in Desk 3, the evaluation outcomes for the unified PLOs based mostly on the progress take a look at outcomes for B.Sc. college students are akin to Pharm.D. college students relating to information and abilities domains and they’re much decrease within the competence area. One-way single issue ANOVA to match between B.Sc. and Pharm.D. college students of their achievement within the competence area gave a p-value = 5.99×10−8 indicating a really excessive statistical vital distinction between them. This may be attributed to the character of B.Sc. packages as they’re pharmaceutical product oriented reasonably than affected person oriented.15 It’s well-known that the contribution of fundamental pharmaceutical sciences programs in such packages is way greater in comparison with pharmacy observe and medical pharmacy programs along with lack of experiential coaching. Subsequently, it’s anticipated that B.Sc. college students will obtain decrease than Pharm.D. college students within the competence area which is normally extra linked to pharmacy observe and medical pharmacy programs.
The final column in Desk 3 reveals the evaluation of the unified PLOs based mostly solely on the progress take a look at outcomes of the P4 Pharm.D. college students from the universities that supply Pharm.D. program (C1 – C12). It may be concluded that their achievement within the questions addressing the competence area is greater in comparison with the mixed outcomes of all college students (P1 – P4) the place the p-value = 1.52×10−5. That is anticipated as these are the senior college students of their last 12 months of the Pharm.D. program the place they’ve been by way of virtually all of the phases of the curriculum to attain all of the anticipated studying outcomes.
As proven in Desk 4, it was tough to search out correlation between the typical cGPA and the imply scores of the scholars within the progress take a look at. This might be attributed to the truth that the cGPA is normally calculated based mostly on a collection of periodic summative assessments each semester which isn’t associated to the progress take a look at as a formative software.16 Apart from, the scholars normally set for the progress take a look at with none prior preparation and a few of them won’t even take it critically though their attendance was obligatory. The progress take a look at is a complete take a look at, and subsequently, it’s anticipated that college students within the preliminary ranges of this system won’t be able to accurately reply questions which are meant for greater ranges.
This progress take a look at has proven an excellent potential to be shared amongst schools of pharmacy within the KSA particularly schools that supply Pharm.D. program because the SAQF studying domains are primarily designed for such an expert program. As well as, the validity of the content material has been established and maintained in step with a blueprint relating to the query objects included within the take a look at. The progress take a look at was made up of 100 MCQs with 4 response choices for every. Based mostly on our evaluation of the outcomes, it may be urged right here to have a fifth choice of “I have no idea” for the scholars to pick out and this will probably be meant to reduce guessing as it’s recognized that some questions will probably be tough for some college students to reply.
Subsequently, the progress take a look at can present vital details about a number of features associated to college students and curriculum along with peer comparability amongst pharmacy schools.17 Our take a look at confirmed that the scholars retained the gained information and abilities by way of their progress within the curriculum of the Pharm.D. program as mirrored by greater imply scores of senior college students in comparison with juniors. The expertise of sharing the progress take a look at has been carried out over the previous three educational years by three schools and these are C1, C3 and C4. This expertise was very efficient and it served as one of many key efficiency indicators (KPIs) for the needs of benchmarking and accreditation. Our examine signifies that this expertise might be expanded to be shared amongst bigger variety of schools within the KSA since they’ve many unified Pharm.D. PLOs based mostly on the SAQF domains.
Conclusion
This examine confirmed an awesome potential of sharing a unified progress take a look at on the nationwide stage among the many schools of pharmacy within the KSA. A consistency within the outcomes has been noticed the place there was an apparent increment within the imply scores of the scholars as they progress by way of the skilled program. This means that the progress take a look at is a invaluable software that measures the scholars’ achieve and retention of data and abilities over time by way of the skilled years contemplating that the take a look at will probably be administered yearly. Apart from, sharing a unified take a look at may function a wonderful software for the needs of benchmarking and accreditation. Because the SAQF domains are primarily designed for Pharm.D. program, it is strongly recommended that pharmacy schools which are nonetheless providing B.Sc. program to fully implement and switch to Pharm.D. program.
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of curiosity on this work.
References
1. Alhamoudi A, Alnattah A. Pharmacy schooling in Saudi Arabia: the previous, the current, and the long run. Curr Pharm Educate Be taught. 2018;10(1):54–60. doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2017.09.014
2. Accessible from: https://etec.gov.sa. /Merchandise and Providers/NCAAA/Program Accreditation/Program Accreditation Requirements 2018.
3. Verhoeven BH, Verwijnen GM, Scherpbier AJJA, van der Vleuten CPM. Development of medical information. Med Educ. 2002;36(8):711–717. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01268.x
4. Nash R, Chalmers L, Brown N, Jackson S, Peterson G. A global overview of using competency requirements in undergraduate pharmacy schooling. Pharm Educ. 2015;15:131–141.
5. Peeters MJ. Focusing on evaluation for studying inside pharmacy schooling. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(8):6243. doi:10.5688/ajpe6243
6. Sturpe D. Goal structured medical examination in Physician of Pharmacy packages in the USA. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74:1–6. doi:10.5688/aj7408148
7. Schuwirth L, van der Vleuten CP. Programmatic evaluation: from evaluation of studying to evaluation for studying. Med Trainer. 2011;33:478–485. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2011.565828
8. Vantini I, Benini L. Fashions of studying, coaching and progress analysis of medical college students. Clin Chim Acta. 2008;393(1):13–16. doi:10.1016/j.cca.2008.03.015
9. Medina M. Does competency-based schooling have a job in educational pharmacy in the USA? Pharmacy. 2017;5(1):13–18. doi:10.3390/pharmacy5010013
10. Van der veken J, Valcke M, De Maeseneer J, Schuwirth L, Derese A. Influence on information acquisition of the transition from a standard to an built-in contextual medical curriculum. Med Educ. 2009;43(7):704–713. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03397.x
11. Arnold L, Willoughby TL. The quarterly profile examination. Acad Med. 1990;65(8):515–516. doi:10.1097/00001888-199008000-00005
12. Van der Vleuten CPM, Verwijnen GM, Wijnen WHFW. Fifteen years of expertise with progress testing in a problem-based studying curriculum. Med Trainer. 1996;18(2):103–109. doi:10.3109/01421599609034142
13. Al-Alwan I, Al-Moamary M, Al-Attas N, et al. The progress take a look at as a diagnostic software for a brand new PBL curriculum. Educ Well being. 2011;24(3):493–502.
14. Keijsers C, Brouwers J, de Wildt D, et al. A comparability of medical and pharmacy college students’ information and abilities of pharmacology and pharmacotherapy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;78(4):781–788. doi:10.1111/bcp.12396
15. Supapaan T, Low BY, Wongpoowarak P, Moolasarn S, Anderson C. A transition from BPharm to the PharmD diploma in 5 chosen nations. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2019;16(3):1611. doi:10.18549/PharmPract.2019.3.1611
16. Schuwirth L, van der Vleuten C. Using progress testing. Perspect Med Educ. 2012;1(1):24–30. doi:10.1007/s40037-012-0007-2
17. Plaza CM. Progress examinations in pharmacy schooling. Am J Pharm Educ. 2007;71(4):Article 66. doi:10.5688/aj710466
