Using Machine Learning to Assess Factors Associated with North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination Performance.

IF 3.5 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Douglas R Oyler, Esther P Black, Hope H Brandon, Clark D Kebodeaux, Jeffery C Talbert, Frank Romanelli
{"title":"Using Machine Learning to Assess Factors Associated with North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination Performance.","authors":"Douglas R Oyler, Esther P Black, Hope H Brandon, Clark D Kebodeaux, Jeffery C Talbert, Frank Romanelli","doi":"10.1016/j.ajpe.2025.101885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Pharmacy graduates' declining performance on the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) remains concerning, but specific student factors related to success remain unclear. Machine learning (ML) algorithms may offer improved methods to identify potentially at-risk students before they take the examination.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals graduating from the University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy in 2024 who passed (n=93) or failed (n=30) the NAPLEX on their first attempt were included. Over 20 characteristics related to demographics (e.g., age, sex, residence), undergraduate work (e.g., university, degree obtained, grade point average (GPA)), performance in the Doctor of Pharmacy program (e.g., GPA, elective courses taken, etc.), and engagement with NAPLEX preparatory software (RxPrep) were assessed for each student. CLASSify, a web-based platform for analysis of tabular data, was used to assess each of 8ML algorithms' ability to accurately predict whether a given student passed or failed. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC-ROC) was primarily used to assess model accuracy. Average absolute SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) value ranks were used to assess feature importance across models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four of eight ML algorithms outperformed logistic regression (AUC-ROC 0.860), with the highest AUC-ROC in the random forest model (0.930). Across high performing models, the most important features were score on the college's high stakes progression examination (MileMarker 1), engagement with RxPrep, and traditional measures of academic performance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ML algorithms accurately classified students' NAPLEX first-time performance in this cohort and could offer notable improvements to existing strategies colleges use to identify potentially at-risk students.</p>","PeriodicalId":55530,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","volume":" ","pages":"101885"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpe.2025.101885","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Pharmacy graduates' declining performance on the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) remains concerning, but specific student factors related to success remain unclear. Machine learning (ML) algorithms may offer improved methods to identify potentially at-risk students before they take the examination.

Methods: Individuals graduating from the University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy in 2024 who passed (n=93) or failed (n=30) the NAPLEX on their first attempt were included. Over 20 characteristics related to demographics (e.g., age, sex, residence), undergraduate work (e.g., university, degree obtained, grade point average (GPA)), performance in the Doctor of Pharmacy program (e.g., GPA, elective courses taken, etc.), and engagement with NAPLEX preparatory software (RxPrep) were assessed for each student. CLASSify, a web-based platform for analysis of tabular data, was used to assess each of 8ML algorithms' ability to accurately predict whether a given student passed or failed. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC-ROC) was primarily used to assess model accuracy. Average absolute SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) value ranks were used to assess feature importance across models.

Results: Four of eight ML algorithms outperformed logistic regression (AUC-ROC 0.860), with the highest AUC-ROC in the random forest model (0.930). Across high performing models, the most important features were score on the college's high stakes progression examination (MileMarker 1), engagement with RxPrep, and traditional measures of academic performance.

Conclusion: ML algorithms accurately classified students' NAPLEX first-time performance in this cohort and could offer notable improvements to existing strategies colleges use to identify potentially at-risk students.

使用机器学习评估与北美药剂师执照考试表现相关的因素。
目的:药学毕业生在北美药剂师执照考试(NAPLEX)中的表现下降令人担忧,但与成功相关的具体学生因素尚不清楚。机器学习(ML)算法可以提供改进的方法,在考试前识别有潜在风险的学生。方法:纳入2024年肯塔基大学药学院毕业的首次NAPLEX考试通过(n=93)或不及格(n=30)的个体。对每个学生进行了20多个与人口统计(如年龄、性别、居住地)、本科工作(如大学、获得的学位、平均绩点(GPA))、药学博士课程表现(如GPA、选修课程等)以及使用NAPLEX预备软件(RxPrep)相关的特征评估。“分类”是一个基于网络的分析表格数据的平台,它被用来评估每一个8ML算法准确预测一个给定学生是通过还是不及格的能力。受试者工作曲线下面积(AUC-ROC)主要用于评估模型的准确性。使用平均绝对SHapley加性解释(SHAP)值排名来评估模型之间的特征重要性。结果:8种ML算法中有4种算法的AUC-ROC优于logistic回归(AUC-ROC 0.860),其中随机森林模型的AUC-ROC最高(0.930)。在高性能模型中,最重要的特征是大学高风险升学考试(MileMarker 1)的分数、与RxPrep的接触以及传统的学业表现衡量标准。结论:ML算法准确地分类了该队列中学生的NAPLEX首次表现,并且可以为大学用于识别潜在风险学生的现有策略提供显着改进。
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
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
15.20%
发文量
114
期刊介绍: The Journal accepts unsolicited manuscripts that have not been published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Journal only considers material related to pharmaceutical education for publication. Authors must prepare manuscripts to conform to the Journal style (Author Instructions). All manuscripts are subject to peer review and approval by the editor prior to acceptance for publication. Reviewers are assigned by the editor with the advice of the editorial board as needed. Manuscripts are submitted and processed online (Submit a Manuscript) using Editorial Manager, an online manuscript tracking system that facilitates communication between the editorial office, editor, associate editors, reviewers, and authors. After a manuscript is accepted, it is scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of the Journal. All manuscripts are formatted and copyedited, and returned to the author for review and approval of the changes. Approximately 2 weeks prior to publication, the author receives an electronic proof of the article for final review and approval. Authors are not assessed page charges for publication.
×
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