Julia Weber, Kirsty Freeman, Samuel Allemann, Rhonda Clifford, Liza Seubert
{"title":"Assessing behavioural skills in pharmacy education: a scoping review of instruments and evaluation practices.","authors":"Julia Weber, Kirsty Freeman, Samuel Allemann, Rhonda Clifford, Liza Seubert","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riag139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This scoping review aimed to map assessment instruments used to evaluate behavioural skills in pharmacy education and to identify gaps in assessment approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. Seven databases were searched. Peer-reviewed studies published between 1999 and 2025 were included. Sources were screened and reviewed, and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Findings were presented in tables with a narrative synthesis of patterns and gaps.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>Thirty instruments assessing behavioural skills were identified. Communication was assessed in 21 instruments, while teamwork was assessed in five and professionalism and safety in three each. Among other skills, decision-making and prioritization and critical thinking and problem-solving were each assessed in one instrument. The number of behavioural markers varied widely (2-75), and similar behaviours were often described differently across instruments. Validity evidence was reported in 18 instruments. Most instruments used unanchored ordinal rating scales (19), and five included a qualitative feedback option. Overall, 23 instruments assessed a single skill, while seven assessed multiple skills.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Behavioural skills assessment in pharmacy education mainly focuses on communication. Marker definitions vary across instruments and reporting of validity and rating scale design is limited. Current instruments therefore capture only part of the behavioural skills expected in practice. Clearer definitions, broader assessment approaches, and improved reporting can help strengthen behavioural skill assessment in pharmacy education.</p>","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riag139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This scoping review aimed to map assessment instruments used to evaluate behavioural skills in pharmacy education and to identify gaps in assessment approaches.
Methods: The review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews reporting guidelines. Seven databases were searched. Peer-reviewed studies published between 1999 and 2025 were included. Sources were screened and reviewed, and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Findings were presented in tables with a narrative synthesis of patterns and gaps.
Key findings: Thirty instruments assessing behavioural skills were identified. Communication was assessed in 21 instruments, while teamwork was assessed in five and professionalism and safety in three each. Among other skills, decision-making and prioritization and critical thinking and problem-solving were each assessed in one instrument. The number of behavioural markers varied widely (2-75), and similar behaviours were often described differently across instruments. Validity evidence was reported in 18 instruments. Most instruments used unanchored ordinal rating scales (19), and five included a qualitative feedback option. Overall, 23 instruments assessed a single skill, while seven assessed multiple skills.
Conclusions: Behavioural skills assessment in pharmacy education mainly focuses on communication. Marker definitions vary across instruments and reporting of validity and rating scale design is limited. Current instruments therefore capture only part of the behavioural skills expected in practice. Clearer definitions, broader assessment approaches, and improved reporting can help strengthen behavioural skill assessment in pharmacy education.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice (IJPP) is a Medline-indexed, peer reviewed, international journal. It is one of the leading journals publishing health services research in the context of pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, medicines and medicines management. Regular sections in the journal include, editorials, literature reviews, original research, personal opinion and short communications. Topics covered include: medicines utilisation, medicine management, medicines distribution, supply and administration, pharmaceutical services, professional and patient/lay perspectives, public health (including, e.g. health promotion, needs assessment, health protection) evidence based practice, pharmacy education. Methods include both evaluative and exploratory work including, randomised controlled trials, surveys, epidemiological approaches, case studies, observational studies, and qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups. Application of methods drawn from other disciplines e.g. psychology, health economics, morbidity are especially welcome as are developments of new methodologies.