Cultivating future pharmacists: a systematic review of educator-led reflective practice methods and their impact on student competencies.

Korean journal of medical education Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-19 DOI:10.3946/kjme.2025.052
Nurul Maziyyah, Bangunawati Rahajeng, Widya Wasityastuti, Eti Nurwening Sholikhah
{"title":"Cultivating future pharmacists: a systematic review of educator-led reflective practice methods and their impact on student competencies.","authors":"Nurul Maziyyah, Bangunawati Rahajeng, Widya Wasityastuti, Eti Nurwening Sholikhah","doi":"10.3946/kjme.2025.052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to explore various educator-led reflective practice methods implemented in pharmacy education, along with their outcomes and impacts on students.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) systematic review method was used, and articles from the year 2003 to 2024 were obtained from three databases, namely PubMed, SCOPUS, and ERIC with keywords defined according to the study objective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 298 articles were identified from the databases with a total of 25 included for review. Studies generally showed moderate quality, with an average MERSQI (Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument) score of 10.56. The literatures revealed that reflective practice has significantly increased during the past few decades, employing various methods, including written, non-written, and digital approaches. Reflective practice gave impact to several outcomes such as improvement in students' academic performance, critical thinking skills, clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities, metacognitive skills, deep-information processing skills, professional attitude, self-awareness, as well as collaborative skills.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reflective practice in pharmacy education has evolved, integrating diverse methods that yield significant benefits in learning and teaching process. Although positive outcomes were seen in the studies, methodological limitations suggest a need for more rigorous research. Structured and efficient educator-led reflective practice in pharmacy education is crucial for preparing students to meet the growing demands in healthcare system.</p>","PeriodicalId":37737,"journal":{"name":"Korean journal of medical education","volume":"38 1","pages":"82-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12971145/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean journal of medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2025.052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to explore various educator-led reflective practice methods implemented in pharmacy education, along with their outcomes and impacts on students.

Methods: A PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) systematic review method was used, and articles from the year 2003 to 2024 were obtained from three databases, namely PubMed, SCOPUS, and ERIC with keywords defined according to the study objective.

Results: A total of 298 articles were identified from the databases with a total of 25 included for review. Studies generally showed moderate quality, with an average MERSQI (Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument) score of 10.56. The literatures revealed that reflective practice has significantly increased during the past few decades, employing various methods, including written, non-written, and digital approaches. Reflective practice gave impact to several outcomes such as improvement in students' academic performance, critical thinking skills, clinical reasoning and decision-making abilities, metacognitive skills, deep-information processing skills, professional attitude, self-awareness, as well as collaborative skills.

Conclusion: Reflective practice in pharmacy education has evolved, integrating diverse methods that yield significant benefits in learning and teaching process. Although positive outcomes were seen in the studies, methodological limitations suggest a need for more rigorous research. Structured and efficient educator-led reflective practice in pharmacy education is crucial for preparing students to meet the growing demands in healthcare system.

Abstract Image

培养未来的药剂师:教育工作者主导的反思性实践方法及其对学生能力的影响的系统回顾。
目的:本研究旨在探讨在药学教育中实施的各种教育者主导的反思性实践方法,以及这些方法的效果和对学生的影响。方法:采用PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta - analysis)系统评价方法,从PubMed、SCOPUS和ERIC三个数据库中获取2003 - 2024年的文献,并根据研究目的定义关键词。结果:从数据库中共识别出298篇文献,其中25篇纳入综述。研究总体质量一般,MERSQI(医学教育研究质量工具)平均得分为10.56。文献显示,在过去的几十年里,反思实践显著增加,采用各种方法,包括书面、非书面和数字方法。反思性实践对学生学习成绩、批判性思维技能、临床推理和决策能力、元认知技能、深度信息处理技能、专业态度、自我意识和协作技能等方面的提高产生了影响。结论:反思性实践在药学教育中不断发展,整合了多种方法,在学习和教学过程中产生了显著的效益。虽然在研究中看到了积极的结果,但方法上的局限性表明需要进行更严格的研究。结构化和有效的教育工作者主导的反思性实践在药学教育是至关重要的准备学生,以满足医疗保健系统日益增长的需求。
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
Korean journal of medical education
Korean journal of medical education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The journal seeks to provide theoretical foundations, practical analysis, and up-to-date developments in health professional education: Curriculum development Teaching and learning Student assessment Educational evaluation Educational management and policy The journal welcomes high-quality papers on all levels of health professional education, including: Undergraduate education Postgraduate training Continuous professional development Interprofessional education.
×
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
小红书