METHODS: The perspective, experiences and insights of educators from various backgrounds, origin and educational levels were sought regarding the role of pharmacy education in providing pharmaceutical research and development workforce.
RESULTS: Many countries around the world are currently undertaking major reforms in pharmacy education due to the changing landscape of health and healthcare delivery. These reforms must be accompanied by robust systems to assure that the quality of educational structures, processes and outcomes will produce competent pharmacy graduates in the future. It is also considered imperative that pharmacy academic institutions should establish collaboration with the drug development units, the pharmaceutical industry and government agencies for sustainability and positive research outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Shortcomings in pharmacy curricula need to be addressed and the authors have proposed the 'TARGET' approach for the development of integrated pharmacy curriculum to substantially contribute to pharmaceutical research and development.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity and reliability of the PPCI for physicians in Malaysia.
SETTING: An urban tertiary hospital in Malaysia.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from June to August 2014. Doctors were grouped as either a "collaborator" or a "non-collaborator". Collaborators were doctors who regularly worked with one particular clinical pharmacist in their ward, while non-collaborators were doctors who interacted with any random pharmacist who answered the general pharmacy telephone line whenever they required assistance on medication-related enquiries, as they did not have a clinical pharmacist in their ward. Collaborators were firstly identified by the clinical pharmacist he/she worked with, then invited to participate in this study through email, as it was difficult to locate and approach them personally. Non-collaborators were sampled conveniently by approaching them in person as these doctors could be easily sampled from any wards without a clinical pharmacist. The PPCI for physicians was administered at baseline and 2 weeks later.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Validity (face validity, factor analysis and discriminative validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) of the PPCI for physicians.
RESULTS: A total of 116 doctors (18 collaborators and 98 non-collaborators) were recruited. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the PPCI for physicians was a 3-factor model. The correlation of the mean domain scores ranged from 0.711 to 0.787. "Collaborators" had significantly higher scores compared to "non-collaborators" (81.4 ± 10.1 vs. 69.3 ± 12.1, p < 0.001). The Cronbach alpha for the overall PPCI for physicians was 0.949, while the Cronbach alpha values for the individual domains ranged from 0.877 to 0.926. Kappa values at test-retest ranged from 0.553 to 0.752.
CONCLUSION: The PPCI for physicians was a valid and reliable measure in determining doctors' views about collaborative working relationship with pharmacists, in Malaysia.
METHODS: A research proposal writing format was created for the 4th year medical students of Melaka Manipal Medical College, Malaysia during their ophthalmology clinical postings. The students worked in small groups and developed research protocols through an evidence based approach. This was followed by writing reflective summaries in academic portfolios about the activity undertaken. A mixed methods study was designed to explore the possible role of collaborative research proposal writing in enhancing critical thinking and collaborative learning.
RESULTS: Analysis of reflections submitted by 188 medical students after the intervention indicate that majority of them found an improvement in their skills of critical thinking and collaborative learning as a result of research protocol writing. All participants agreed that the model helped in applying concepts to new situations in the form of designing their own study, which reflected in enhanced higher order cognitive skills.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that the introduction of a structured module in the core medical curriculum that focuses on research writing skills embedded with collaborative and reflective practices can enhance collaborative learning, critical thinking, and reasoning among medical students.
METHODS: The principal investigators of three birth cohorts in Asia including the Taiwan Birth Panel Study (TBPS), the Mothers and Children's Environmental Health Study (MOCEH), and the Hokkaido Study on Environment and Children' Health (Hokkaido Study) coestablished the Birth Cohort Consortium of Asia (BiCCA) in 2011. Through a series of five PI meetings, the enrolment criteria, aim of the consortium, and a first-phase inventory were confirmed.
RESULTS: To date, 23 birth cohorts have been established in 10 Asian countries, consisting of approximately 70,000 study subjects in the BiCCA. This article provides the study framework, environmental exposure and health outcome assessments, as well as maternal and infant characteristics of the participating cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS: The BiCCA provides a unique and reliable source of birth cohort information in Asian countries. Further scientific cooperation is ongoing to identify specific regional environmental threats and improve the health of children in Asia.
RESULTS: Important issues were identified during the data harmonisation process relating to data ownership, sharing methodologies and ethical concerns. Measures were assessed across eight domains; demographic; dietary; clinical and anthropometric; medical history; hypertension knowledge; physical activity; behavioural (smoking and alcohol); and biochemical domains. Identifying validated measures relevant across a variety of settings presented some difficulties. The resulting GACD hypertension data dictionary comprises 67 consensus measures. Of the 14 responding teams, only two teams were including more than 50 consensus variables, five teams were including between 25 and 50 consensus variables and four teams were including between 6 and 24 consensus variables, one team did not provide details of the variables collected and two teams did not include any of the consensus variables as the project had already commenced or the measures were not relevant to their study.
CONCLUSIONS: Deriving consensus measures across diverse research projects and contexts was challenging. The major barrier to their implementation was related to the time taken to develop and present these measures. Inclusion of consensus measures into future funding announcements would facilitate researchers integrating these measures within application protocols. We suggest that adoption of consensus measures developed here, across the field of hypertension, would help advance the science in this area, allowing for more comparable data sets and generalizable inferences.