Search

Prioritizing a drug therapy problem (DTP) during an experiential placement is challenging for some pharmacy students, suggesting a gap in pre-placement preparedness and the need to modify existing resources. A modified DTP prioritizing framework is proposed to enhance clinical reasoning and increase students' confidence in performing this important step in the pharmaceutical care process. Students' baseline DTP prioritizing capability was assessed in an informal focus group consisting of pharmacy students and experienced hospital pharmacy preceptors. Participants ranked the urgency for addressing 47 common medical conditions and selected a time frame to resolve the DTP. Participants also provided feedback on a proposed DTP prioritizing framework. A modified, student-focused DTP prioritizing framework, incorporating elements of curricular knowledge, principal elements of urgency, and time frame for taking action to resolve the identified DTP is described. Students' DTP urgency rankings were heterogeneous and showed greater deviation from the anticipated ranking (R = 0.61) compared to the pharmacist cohort (R = 0.807), reinforcing our view of the need for a modified DTP prioritizing framework for students. In qualitative terms, students felt the framework's focus on curricular knowledge would contribute to the development of expertise. Preceptors felt the framework reflected their usual practice and would help guide discussions with students. The modified DTP prioritizing framework, described in this article, may be utilized both to enhance student success and preceptor development in the experiential setting. • Harm, speed of harm and the patient's perspective are the primary determinants of the urgency of a drug therapy problem. • An explicit, curriculum-based decision-making process will help students determine the urgency of a drug therapy problem. • The concept of importance (i.e., what matters to the patient) is a key element of the patient's perspective of urgency. • The pharmaceutical care− urgency (PC − U) framework aims to strengthen students' performance during experiential placements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: (Ba0.68−x Sr0.308Bi0.006Na0.006Mg x )(Ti0.99Sn0.01)O3 ceramics were synthesized by solid-state reaction process. The samples (X ≤0.010) are a mixture of cubic (major) and rhombohedral (minor) phases. The rhombohedral phase causes a large dielectric loss in low temperature regions and plays an important role in diffuse phase transition of ceramics. While X >0.010, the rhombohedral phase decreases and gradually disappears. The dielectric loss of ceramics in the low temperature regions decreases, and the samples change from the diffuse phase transition to the phase transition of second order, and then to of first order. In the temperature range of 270–370°C, intrinsic conduction dominates conductivity of ceramics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluate a randomized field experiment to study the effect of financial workshops for domestic workers in Singapore. Groups of women met monthly with a trained mentor. Take-up rates were low and our results are inconclusive as to whether invitations to these workshops improved financial knowledge and behavior. Unexpectedly, treatment assignment had a significant, negative effect on self-reported savings. Further exploration suggests that assignment to treatment could affect participants' awareness of accumulated savings. We find a reduction in the number of savings accounts reported and an increase in the probability respondents report having disagreements with family members over finances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interventions to promote learning are often categorized into supply- and demand-side approaches. In a randomized experiment to promote learning about COVID-19 among Mozambican adults, we study the interaction between a supply and a demand intervention, respectively: teaching via targeted feedback, and providing financial incentives to learners. In theory, teaching and learner-incentives may be substitutes (crowding out one another) or complements (enhancing one another). Experts surveyed in advance predicted a high degree of substitutability between the two treatments. In contrast, we find substantially more complementarity than experts predicted. Combining teaching and incentive treatments raises COVID-19 knowledge test scores by 0.5 standard deviations, though the standalone teaching treatment is the most cost-effective. The complementarity between teaching and incentives persists in the longer run, over nine months post-treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]