A Modified Delphi Study to Establish Essential Clinical Pharmacology Competencies.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-06 DOI:10.1007/s43441-023-00609-y
Bernadette Johnson-Williams, Kellie Reynolds, Joga Gobburu, Albert Rundio
{"title":"A Modified Delphi Study to Establish Essential Clinical Pharmacology Competencies.","authors":"Bernadette Johnson-Williams, Kellie Reynolds, Joga Gobburu, Albert Rundio","doi":"10.1007/s43441-023-00609-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Competency-based education has been commonly used to enhance the healthcare workforce for some time. A translational discipline that is integral to drug development and impactful on healthcare and public health is clinical pharmacology. With such contribution, it is essential that the clinical pharmacology workforce is adequately equipped to address the demands of emerging trends of drug development.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to determine the most significant competencies needed for a clinical pharmacologist in the regulatory environment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two round modified Delphi technique was administered to 29 clinical pharmacologists within the Office of Clinical Pharmacology (OCP) between November 2021-January 2022. A questionnaire consisting of core and technical competencies was administered electronically using SurveyMonkey ® to gain consensus about essential clinical pharmacology competencies. Participants used a Likert scale to rank importance of competencies from strongly agree (1), agree (2), neutral (3), disagree (4), strongly disagree (5). Participants also suggested topics to be included in the next round. Consensus was set at 60%. The competencies receiving the most consensus at 60% in round one and the new topics proceeded to the second round. In the second and final round, participants ranked the suggested competencies. Descriptive statistics and a McNemar change test were utilized to analyze data. Only data from the participants who completed both rounds was used in the study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In round one participants ranked all fifty-six core and technical competencies as essential with consensus of at least 60%. In round two, participants ranked sixty-two competencies as essential with consensus of at least 60%. A McNemar change test demonstrated stability of ranking between rounds.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Essential core and technical competencies can build education programs to sustain the emerging clinical pharmacology workforce in the Office of Clinical Pharmacology. The Delphi technique is a suitable approach to determine essential competencies because it cultivates consensus and gains insight from experts in the forefront of drug development.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":"473-482"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11043191/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-023-00609-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Competency-based education has been commonly used to enhance the healthcare workforce for some time. A translational discipline that is integral to drug development and impactful on healthcare and public health is clinical pharmacology. With such contribution, it is essential that the clinical pharmacology workforce is adequately equipped to address the demands of emerging trends of drug development.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to determine the most significant competencies needed for a clinical pharmacologist in the regulatory environment.

Methods: A two round modified Delphi technique was administered to 29 clinical pharmacologists within the Office of Clinical Pharmacology (OCP) between November 2021-January 2022. A questionnaire consisting of core and technical competencies was administered electronically using SurveyMonkey ® to gain consensus about essential clinical pharmacology competencies. Participants used a Likert scale to rank importance of competencies from strongly agree (1), agree (2), neutral (3), disagree (4), strongly disagree (5). Participants also suggested topics to be included in the next round. Consensus was set at 60%. The competencies receiving the most consensus at 60% in round one and the new topics proceeded to the second round. In the second and final round, participants ranked the suggested competencies. Descriptive statistics and a McNemar change test were utilized to analyze data. Only data from the participants who completed both rounds was used in the study.

Results: In round one participants ranked all fifty-six core and technical competencies as essential with consensus of at least 60%. In round two, participants ranked sixty-two competencies as essential with consensus of at least 60%. A McNemar change test demonstrated stability of ranking between rounds.

Conclusion: Essential core and technical competencies can build education programs to sustain the emerging clinical pharmacology workforce in the Office of Clinical Pharmacology. The Delphi technique is a suitable approach to determine essential competencies because it cultivates consensus and gains insight from experts in the forefront of drug development.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
修改后的德尔菲研究,以确定临床药理学的基本能力。
导言:一段时间以来,能力本位教育已普遍用于提高医疗保健人员的能力。临床药理学是一门转化学科,与药物开发密不可分,并对医疗保健和公共卫生产生影响。临床药理学的贡献如此之大,因此临床药理学人员必须具备足够的能力,以应对药物开发新趋势的需求:本研究的主要目的是确定临床药理学家在监管环境中所需的最重要能力:在 2021 年 11 月至 2022 年 1 月期间,对临床药理学办公室 (OCP) 的 29 名临床药理学家进行了两轮改良德尔菲技术调查。使用 SurveyMonkey ® 以电子方式发放了一份由核心能力和技术能力组成的调查问卷,以就基本临床药理学能力达成共识。参与者使用李克特量表对能力的重要性进行了排序:非常同意 (1)、同意 (2)、中立 (3)、不同意 (4)、非常不同意 (5)。与会者还提出了下一轮的议题。共识率设定为 60%。在第一轮中获得最多共识(60%)的能力和新议题进入第二轮。在第二轮也是最后一轮中,参与者对建议的能力进行排名。数据分析采用了描述性统计和 McNemar 变化检验。研究仅使用了完成两轮的参与者的数据:在第一轮中,参与者将所有 56 项核心能力和技术能力都列为必备能力,共识度至少达到 60%。在第二轮中,参与者将六十二项能力列为必备能力,共识度至少为 60%。McNemar 变化测试表明,各轮之间的排序具有稳定性:结论:基本核心能力和技术能力可以建立教育计划,以维持临床药理办公室新兴的临床药理人才队伍。德尔菲技术是确定基本能力的合适方法,因为它能达成共识,并从药物开发前沿的专家那里获得真知灼见。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Borrowing Methods for Incorporating Historical Data in Single-Arm Phase II Clinical Trials. Testing the Feasibility of a Digital Point of Care Solution for the Trusted Near Real-Time Bidirectional Exchange of Novel and Informative Adverse Event Information. Better Medicines for Children: Lessons Learnt and Share Learnings at the EFGCP Annual Paediatric Conferences. An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database for MAGnetic Expansion Control Spinal Rods. Principles for Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Ceramic Dental Implants in Japan.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1