A longitudinal evaluation of retention of pharmacy law knowledge by pharmacy students

IF 1.4 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Emily Van Klompenburg, Alex William Middendorf, Scout Forbes-Hurd
{"title":"A longitudinal evaluation of retention of pharmacy law knowledge by pharmacy students","authors":"Emily Van Klompenburg,&nbsp;Alex William Middendorf,&nbsp;Scout Forbes-Hurd","doi":"10.1016/j.cptl.2025.102483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Pharmacy law knowledge is an important component of a pharmacy student's education, guiding future pharmacists on regulatory frameworks for pharmacy practice. However, limited research exists regarding longitudinal retention of pharmacy law knowledge. The objective of this study was to assess the short-term and long-term retention of pharmacy law knowledge for a single cohort of pharmacy students by comparing individual performance across three law-focused assessments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Percent change in individual student performance was tracked across three specific assessments. The change between the first two assessments (P2 didactic course and P3 summer IPPE) assessed short-term retention, and the change between the first and third (P4 Community Pharmacy APPE) assessed long-term retention. Assessment results were converted to percentages to allow for direct comparisons given diversity of assessment structure.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>63 of 65 (96.9 %) of students completed all three assessments. Knowledge of pharmacy law was maintained from Assessment 1 to Assessment 2 and from Assessment 1 to Assessment 3. Student scores indicated a slight increase in short-term knowledge (average + 8 %, range ‐34 % to +38 %, <em>p</em> = 0.00016) and a slight decrease in long-term knowledge (average ‐6 %, range ‐34 % to +18 %, <em>p</em> = 0.000047).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Assessing pharmacy law knowledge scores at multiple points in the curriculum provided an analysis of short-term and long-term knowledge retention. While short-term knowledge of law was retained, long-term knowledge showed deterioration, but not to the extent expected. This may be due to the modified spaced repetition of pharmacy law assessments, blunting the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve effect or students exhibiting a testing effect. However, law touch points, such as incorporating a regulatory assessment into care plans, throughout the curriculum may be beneficial to overall law knowledge retention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47501,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","volume":"18 1","pages":"Article 102483"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877129725002047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Pharmacy law knowledge is an important component of a pharmacy student's education, guiding future pharmacists on regulatory frameworks for pharmacy practice. However, limited research exists regarding longitudinal retention of pharmacy law knowledge. The objective of this study was to assess the short-term and long-term retention of pharmacy law knowledge for a single cohort of pharmacy students by comparing individual performance across three law-focused assessments.

Methods

Percent change in individual student performance was tracked across three specific assessments. The change between the first two assessments (P2 didactic course and P3 summer IPPE) assessed short-term retention, and the change between the first and third (P4 Community Pharmacy APPE) assessed long-term retention. Assessment results were converted to percentages to allow for direct comparisons given diversity of assessment structure.

Results

63 of 65 (96.9 %) of students completed all three assessments. Knowledge of pharmacy law was maintained from Assessment 1 to Assessment 2 and from Assessment 1 to Assessment 3. Student scores indicated a slight increase in short-term knowledge (average + 8 %, range ‐34 % to +38 %, p = 0.00016) and a slight decrease in long-term knowledge (average ‐6 %, range ‐34 % to +18 %, p = 0.000047).

Conclusion

Assessing pharmacy law knowledge scores at multiple points in the curriculum provided an analysis of short-term and long-term knowledge retention. While short-term knowledge of law was retained, long-term knowledge showed deterioration, but not to the extent expected. This may be due to the modified spaced repetition of pharmacy law assessments, blunting the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve effect or students exhibiting a testing effect. However, law touch points, such as incorporating a regulatory assessment into care plans, throughout the curriculum may be beneficial to overall law knowledge retention.
药学院学生药法知识保留的纵向评价
药学法律知识是药学专业学生教育的重要组成部分,指导未来的药剂师对药学实践的监管框架。然而,关于药剂法知识纵向保留的研究有限。本研究的目的是通过比较三个以法律为重点的评估中的个人表现,来评估一组药学学生短期和长期保留药法知识的情况。方法通过三个具体的评估来跟踪每个学生表现的百分比变化。前两次评估(P2教学课程和P3夏季IPPE)之间的变化评估短期保留,第一次和第三次评估(P4社区药房APPE)之间的变化评估长期保留。鉴于评估结构的多样性,评估结果被转换成百分比,以便进行直接比较。结果65名学生中有63名(96.9%)完成了三项评估。从评估1到评估2和从评估1到评估3保持对药法的了解。学生的分数表明,短期知识略有增加(平均+ 8%,范围从‐34%到+ 38%,p = 0.00016),长期知识略有下降(平均- 6%,范围从‐34%到+ 18%,p = 0.000047)。结论通过对课程中药法知识的多分制评分,可以分析学生的短期和长期知识留存情况。虽然短期的法律知识得到了保留,但长期的知识却出现了退化,但并没有达到预期的程度。这可能是由于修改了药法评估的间隔重复,减弱了艾宾浩斯遗忘曲线效应或学生表现出测试效应。然而,在整个课程中,法律接触点,例如将监管评估纳入护理计划,可能有利于整体法律知识的保留。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
192
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信