| Title |
Opinion of hospital pharmacy practitioners toward the Continuing Pharmacy Education program: a study from a tertiary care hospital in central Nepal
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/iprp.s145026 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ramesh Sharma Poudel, Rano Mal Piryani, Shakti Shrestha, Roshan Chaurasiya, Bed Prakash Niure |
| Abstract |
Meeting participants' needs and matching their preferences are important prerequisites for an effective Continuing Pharmacy Education (CPE) program. The objective of this pilot study was to assess the opinion of hospital pharmacy practitioners with respect to the CPE program. The pretested questionnaires were distributed to 20 pharmacy practitioners working in a pharmacy at a tertiary care hospital in Nepal which asked for their opinions and suggestions with respect to the CPE program. Descriptive statistics were performed using IBM SPSS version 20. Topics related to skills development (75%) and recent innovations in pharmacy practice (65%) were mostly preferred. Live (in-person) presentations (80%) and small group discussion (60%) were the most suitable methods for delivery. Improving knowledge (75%), improving skills (60%) and keeping up-to-date in the latest information (60%) were major motivating factors to participate, while lack of time (75%) was a major barrier. Approximately 55% of the participants believed that face-to-face interview was a suitable method for evaluating the effectiveness. Allocation of separate time for the program, assessing baseline knowledge and skills of the participants along with delivery of quality materials in an understandable way were the top common suggestions for improving the CPE program. Hospital pharmacy practitioners' opinions and suggestions were assessed with respect to the CPE program and this was upgraded accordingly to meet their expectations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 29% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 14% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,365,413
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice
#57
of 102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,624
of 316,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.