M. Abdalla, M. Saad, D. Abazia, et al., “Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: Evidence, Challenges, and Best Practices: An Opinion of the Drug Information Practice and Research Network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy,” Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy 8, no. 12 (2025): 1333–1361, https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70131.
There is an error with regard to the affiliation of the author Maggie Segovia.
The correct affiliation is: University Hospitals, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
We apologize for this error.
M. Abdalla， M. Saad， D. Abazia等人，“在医疗保健中负责任地使用人工智能：证据、挑战和最佳实践：美国临床药学学院药物信息实践和研究网络的意见”，《美国临床药学学院杂志》第8期。12 (2025): 1333-1361, https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70131.There是关于作者玛吉·塞戈维亚的从属关系的错误。正确的联系是：University Hospitals， Cleveland, Ohio, usa。我们为这个错误道歉。
{"title":"Correction to “Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: Evidence, Challenges, and Best Practices: An Opinion of the Drug Information Practice and Research Network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy”","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70176","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70176","url":null,"abstract":"<p>M. Abdalla, M. Saad, D. Abazia, et al., “Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: Evidence, Challenges, and Best Practices: An Opinion of the Drug Information Practice and Research Network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy,” <i>Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy</i> 8, no. 12 (2025): 1333–1361, https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70131.</p><p>There is an error with regard to the affiliation of the author Maggie Segovia.</p><p>The correct affiliation is: University Hospitals, Cleveland, Ohio, USA</p><p>We apologize for this error.</p>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jac5.70176","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146099279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Clinical Pharmacy's Big Short: Systematic Workforce Fragility in an Era of Rising Costs and Stagnant Wages","authors":"Brian W. Gilbert, Joe Slechta","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70175","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146096575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Chris Johnson, Mariny Whitworth, Benjamin S. Teeter
Background
Substance use disorders (SUDs) and overdose deaths remain an important issue in public health and pharmacy practice. This societal need translates to a need in pharmacy education to create durable knowledge and perceptions regarding these patients in pharmacy students. Despite this need, rich, descriptive approaches of activities to prepare pharmacy students to care for and advocate for patients with substance use disorders are lacking.
Methods
This study aimed to examine the effect of a skills lab session on pharmacy students' knowledge and perceptions of SUDs and harm reduction before and after the session, including the durability of changes at 12 months after the session. This study surveyed pharmacy students using the Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale (OOKS) and Drugs and Drug Users' Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (DDUPPQ) before, immediately after, and 12 months after a skills lab session. The session occurred during the fall of the second professional year and included a mini-lecture on SUDs and harm reduction approaches, a video on the real-world use of naloxone, group discussion, and practice on naloxone counseling. Data was analyzed using paired t-tests and descriptive statistics.
Results
A total of 163 students completed the pre- and immediate post-survey, with 20 students completing the 12-month follow-up survey. Student scores on the OOKS and DDUPPQ, including most subscales, significantly improved on the immediate post-test compared with the pre-test. Results were mixed at the 12-month follow-up test: only one domain of the OOKS significantly decreased, but three out of five subscales on the DDUPPQ significantly worsened.
Conclusion
A skills lab session may improve pharmacy student knowledge and perceptions regarding SUDs and harm reduction. However, the follow-up results indicate that knowledge improvement may not be durable at 12 months. More research is needed to examine approaches, including improved scaffolding within curricula, to create a durable impact on knowledge and perceptions in this area.
{"title":"Impact and Durability of a Skills-Lab Session on Pharmacy Student Knowledge and Perceptions of Substance Use Disorders and Harm Reduction","authors":"Chris Johnson, Mariny Whitworth, Benjamin S. Teeter","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70174","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70174","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Substance use disorders (SUDs) and overdose deaths remain an important issue in public health and pharmacy practice. This societal need translates to a need in pharmacy education to create durable knowledge and perceptions regarding these patients in pharmacy students. Despite this need, rich, descriptive approaches of activities to prepare pharmacy students to care for and advocate for patients with substance use disorders are lacking.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study aimed to examine the effect of a skills lab session on pharmacy students' knowledge and perceptions of SUDs and harm reduction before and after the session, including the durability of changes at 12 months after the session. This study surveyed pharmacy students using the Opioid Overdose Knowledge Scale (OOKS) and Drugs and Drug Users' Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (DDUPPQ) before, immediately after, and 12 months after a skills lab session. The session occurred during the fall of the second professional year and included a mini-lecture on SUDs and harm reduction approaches, a video on the real-world use of naloxone, group discussion, and practice on naloxone counseling. Data was analyzed using paired <i>t</i>-tests and descriptive statistics.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A total of 163 students completed the pre- and immediate post-survey, with 20 students completing the 12-month follow-up survey. Student scores on the OOKS and DDUPPQ, including most subscales, significantly improved on the immediate post-test compared with the pre-test. Results were mixed at the 12-month follow-up test: only one domain of the OOKS significantly decreased, but three out of five subscales on the DDUPPQ significantly worsened.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A skills lab session may improve pharmacy student knowledge and perceptions regarding SUDs and harm reduction. However, the follow-up results indicate that knowledge improvement may not be durable at 12 months. More research is needed to examine approaches, including improved scaffolding within curricula, to create a durable impact on knowledge and perceptions in this area.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146096519","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Robert J. DiDomenico, Susan E. Smith, Alexandre Chan, Zachary Dougherty, Kristin Griebe, Young R. Lee, Brian Murray, Russel J. Roberts, Emily T. Shin, Josephine M. Vonderhaar, Kyle A. Weant
The American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) advocates for board certification of clinical pharmacists in one of the recognized specialties as a fundamental qualification and requirement for providing and supervising trainees in the provision of direct patient care. However, data linking pharmacist board certification to patient outcomes are limited, and many methodological challenges exist to effectively evaluate the impact of board-certified pharmacists (BCPs). The purpose of this ACCP white paper is to critically analyze study design characteristics in order to inform future studies assessing the impact of BCPs on patient outcomes. Value depends on the stakeholder perspective, which informs the study design. This white paper considers the feasibility and applicability of various study methods that may be used to evaluate the impact of BCPs, including overall study design, study group assignment, outcome measures, reporting of clinical practice activities, identification of confounding variables, and statistical analyses, including methods to control for confounders. The 2025 ACCP Research Affairs Committee was surveyed to rate the feasibility and applicability of studying the impact of BCPs on outcomes by stakeholder perspective. Studies from the health care system or provider perspectives were rated as providing the best balance between feasibility and applicability, whereas various study design characteristics (e.g., prospective study designs, use of “length of” or disease-related surrogate markers as primary outcomes, adjusting for specific confounders) were rated highly and are desirable for future studies.
{"title":"A Roadmap for Studying the Impact of Pharmacist Board Certification on Patient Outcomes: Feasibility, Applicability, and Methodological Considerations","authors":"Robert J. DiDomenico, Susan E. Smith, Alexandre Chan, Zachary Dougherty, Kristin Griebe, Young R. Lee, Brian Murray, Russel J. Roberts, Emily T. Shin, Josephine M. Vonderhaar, Kyle A. Weant","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70165","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) advocates for board certification of clinical pharmacists in one of the recognized specialties as a fundamental qualification and requirement for providing and supervising trainees in the provision of direct patient care. However, data linking pharmacist board certification to patient outcomes are limited, and many methodological challenges exist to effectively evaluate the impact of board-certified pharmacists (BCPs). The purpose of this ACCP white paper is to critically analyze study design characteristics in order to inform future studies assessing the impact of BCPs on patient outcomes. Value depends on the stakeholder perspective, which informs the study design. This white paper considers the feasibility and applicability of various study methods that may be used to evaluate the impact of BCPs, including overall study design, study group assignment, outcome measures, reporting of clinical practice activities, identification of confounding variables, and statistical analyses, including methods to control for confounders. The 2025 ACCP Research Affairs Committee was surveyed to rate the feasibility and applicability of studying the impact of BCPs on outcomes by stakeholder perspective. Studies from the health care system or provider perspectives were rated as providing the best balance between feasibility and applicability, whereas various study design characteristics (e.g., prospective study designs, use of “length of” or disease-related surrogate markers as primary outcomes, adjusting for specific confounders) were rated highly and are desirable for future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jac5.70165","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146096474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Julie B. Sibbesen, Hannah Trickett, Storee Yzaguirre
Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly transform health care, with substantial implications for pharmacy practice. The integration of AI technologies into formulary management and pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee workflows offers opportunities to enhance evidence-based, safe, and timely clinical decision-making by processing large datasets and delivering actionable insights. While professional pharmacy organizations emphasize responsible AI integration, limited evidence exists on AI performance for formulary management tasks.
Methods
This pilot study qualitatively evaluated six freely available AI tools (Perplexity, Google Gemini, ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Llama, and Claude) for drug monograph development using three previously completed monographs as reference standards. An independent reviewer assessed each AI tool's performance for content accuracy, completeness, source credibility, and clinical relevance.
Results
Initial broad prompts requesting complete monographs yielded responses that were vague, incomplete, or inaccurate across all tools. Refined prompt engineering strategies using targeted, section-specific requests substantially improved output quality, with all AI tools producing more detailed, accurate, and scholarly responses. The tools demonstrated marked variability in source quality and transparency, with some consistently providing citations to peer-reviewed literature while others offered minimal sourcing or relied on less credible references. Literature review capabilities improved substantially when full-text articles were uploaded compared with abstract-only inputs; however, human oversight remains essential for critical evaluation and synthesis of conclusions.
Discussion
The findings from this pilot evaluation provided the foundation for the development of institutional implementation considerations at West Virginia University (WVU) Medicine, establishing five core principles for AI use in formulary management, privacy and compliance requirements, and emphasis on human oversight, with clear delineation of permitted and prohibited applications.
Conclusion
This pilot evaluation provides health care organizations with qualitative performance insights for responsible AI implementation in formulary management workflows.
{"title":"An Evaluation of Six Artificial Intelligence Tools for Formulary Management","authors":"Julie B. Sibbesen, Hannah Trickett, Storee Yzaguirre","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70172","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly transform health care, with substantial implications for pharmacy practice. The integration of AI technologies into formulary management and pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee workflows offers opportunities to enhance evidence-based, safe, and timely clinical decision-making by processing large datasets and delivering actionable insights. While professional pharmacy organizations emphasize responsible AI integration, limited evidence exists on AI performance for formulary management tasks.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This pilot study qualitatively evaluated six freely available AI tools (Perplexity, Google Gemini, ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Llama, and Claude) for drug monograph development using three previously completed monographs as reference standards. An independent reviewer assessed each AI tool's performance for content accuracy, completeness, source credibility, and clinical relevance.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Initial broad prompts requesting complete monographs yielded responses that were vague, incomplete, or inaccurate across all tools. Refined prompt engineering strategies using targeted, section-specific requests substantially improved output quality, with all AI tools producing more detailed, accurate, and scholarly responses. The tools demonstrated marked variability in source quality and transparency, with some consistently providing citations to peer-reviewed literature while others offered minimal sourcing or relied on less credible references. Literature review capabilities improved substantially when full-text articles were uploaded compared with abstract-only inputs; however, human oversight remains essential for critical evaluation and synthesis of conclusions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Discussion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The findings from this pilot evaluation provided the foundation for the development of institutional implementation considerations at West Virginia University (WVU) Medicine, establishing five core principles for AI use in formulary management, privacy and compliance requirements, and emphasis on human oversight, with clear delineation of permitted and prohibited applications.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This pilot evaluation provides health care organizations with qualitative performance insights for responsible AI implementation in formulary management workflows.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146091106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lydia Jackson, Christina White, William Frizzell, Morgan Snyder, Colleen Lewellyan
Background
Opioid use disorder (OUD) has been a growing concern in the United States, and there are significant barriers to accessing timely and consistent treatment. Veterans face disproportionately high rates of OUD, often accompanied by higher rates of mental health disorders and chronic pain. Clinical Pharmacist Practitioners (CPPs) have emerged as key contributors in delivering Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) as part of interdisciplinary care teams. The objectives of this study were to determine whether Veterans with OUD managed by a Substance Use Disorder (SUD) CPP have clinical outcomes comparable with those managed by physicians or nurse practitioners (MD/NPs).
Methods
A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Robley Rex Veterans Affairs Medical Center (RRVAMC). Veterans with MOUD initiated between June 1, 2023 and February 12, 2025 who attended at least three follow-up appointments were included. Patients were grouped by primary provider (CPP vs. MD/NP). The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal overdose, OUD-related hospitalization, and OUD-related emergency department (ED) visits. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, no-show rates, active naloxone prescriptions, prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) screening completion, suicide risk screening completion, and positive urine drug screen (UDS) results.
Results
Seventy-seven patients were included (CPP group, n = 34; MD/NP group, n = 43). There was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome between groups. CPPs had statistically significant higher PDMP screening completion rates. No significant differences were noted in other secondary outcomes.
Conclusion
CPPs provided MOUD care that was safe and effective, with outcomes comparable with those of physicians and nurse practitioners. Their increased use of risk mitigation tools such as PDMP underscores the value of CPP integration into MOUD programs, which can increase access to SUD care.
阿片类药物使用障碍（OUD）在美国日益受到关注，并且在获得及时和一致的治疗方面存在重大障碍。退伍军人面临着不成比例的高OUD率，往往伴随着更高的精神健康障碍和慢性疼痛率。作为跨学科护理团队的一部分，临床药师从业人员（CPPs）已经成为提供阿片类药物使用障碍（mod）药物治疗的关键贡献者。本研究的目的是确定由物质使用障碍（SUD） CPP管理的OUD退伍军人的临床结果是否与由医生或执业护士（MD/NPs）管理的OUD退伍军人的临床结果相当。方法在Robley Rex退伍军人事务医学中心（RRVAMC）进行单中心、回顾性队列研究。在2023年6月1日至2025年2月12日期间开始患有mod的退伍军人，并且至少参加了三次后续预约。患者按主要提供者分组（CPP vs. MD/NP）。主要结局为非致死性用药过量、与oud相关的住院和与oud相关的急诊科（ED）就诊。次要结局包括主要结局的各个组成部分、全因死亡率、缺席率、有效纳洛酮处方、处方药监测程序（PDMP）筛查完成情况、自杀风险筛查完成情况和尿药物筛查（UDS）阳性结果。结果共纳入77例患者，其中CPP组34例，MD/NP组43例。两组间主要综合结局无统计学差异。CPPs的PDMP筛查完成率具有统计学意义。其他次要结局无显著差异。结论cps提供了安全有效的mod护理，其结果与内科医生和执业护士相当。他们越来越多地使用风险缓解工具，如PDMP，强调了CPP整合到mod项目中的价值，这可以增加获得SUD护理的机会。
{"title":"Evaluation of Outcomes for Veterans With Opioid Use Disorder Managed by a Clinical Pharmacist Practitioner","authors":"Lydia Jackson, Christina White, William Frizzell, Morgan Snyder, Colleen Lewellyan","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70164","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70164","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Opioid use disorder (OUD) has been a growing concern in the United States, and there are significant barriers to accessing timely and consistent treatment. Veterans face disproportionately high rates of OUD, often accompanied by higher rates of mental health disorders and chronic pain. Clinical Pharmacist Practitioners (CPPs) have emerged as key contributors in delivering Medication for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD) as part of interdisciplinary care teams. The objectives of this study were to determine whether Veterans with OUD managed by a Substance Use Disorder (SUD) CPP have clinical outcomes comparable with those managed by physicians or nurse practitioners (MD/NPs).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Robley Rex Veterans Affairs Medical Center (RRVAMC). Veterans with MOUD initiated between June 1, 2023 and February 12, 2025 who attended at least three follow-up appointments were included. Patients were grouped by primary provider (CPP vs. MD/NP). The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal overdose, OUD-related hospitalization, and OUD-related emergency department (ED) visits. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, no-show rates, active naloxone prescriptions, prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) screening completion, suicide risk screening completion, and positive urine drug screen (UDS) results.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Seventy-seven patients were included (CPP group, <i>n</i> = 34; MD/NP group, <i>n</i> = 43). There was no statistically significant difference in the primary composite outcome between groups. CPPs had statistically significant higher PDMP screening completion rates. No significant differences were noted in other secondary outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>CPPs provided MOUD care that was safe and effective, with outcomes comparable with those of physicians and nurse practitioners. Their increased use of risk mitigation tools such as PDMP underscores the value of CPP integration into MOUD programs, which can increase access to SUD care.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146007484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) is the predominant statistical framework in biomedical research and clinical pharmacy, so maintaining a thorough understanding of NHST and its component parts is essential for practitioners. NHST begins with an assumption the null hypothesis is true, allowing researchers to test for differences while guarding against bias. Type I error (false positive) and type II error (false negative) are the possible misclassifications. Interpretation of the p-value depends on the assumption that the null hypothesis is true, rather than indicating the probability that the null hypothesis is correct. Misinterpretation of this value remains one of the most persistent errors in medical literature. Sound application of NHST requires deliberate study design, prospective specification of outcomes, and safeguards against multiplicity. Interpretation demands attention to more than statistical thresholds alone, emphasizing effect size, clinical significance, biological plausibility, and study quality. Responsible interpretation also requires distinguishing statistical inference from broader scientific inference, which incorporates prior knowledge and theoretical rationale. Practical considerations and illustrative cases highlight common pitfalls and strategies for improvement. In addition, emerging approaches, including reinterpretation of confidence intervals as compatibility intervals, use of false positive risk, and Bayesian analysis offer potential refinements, though controversies regarding their application remain. Understanding NHST as one component of scientific inference, rather than a definitive arbiter of truth, promotes more thoughtful application and interpretation of evidence. Careful statistical reasoning enhances the quality of research, the reliability of peer review, and the translation of findings into patient care.
{"title":"Research and Scholarly Methods: Testing the Null Hypothesis","authors":"John R. Carr, Susan E. Smith","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70167","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70167","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) is the predominant statistical framework in biomedical research and clinical pharmacy, so maintaining a thorough understanding of NHST and its component parts is essential for practitioners. NHST begins with an assumption the null hypothesis is true, allowing researchers to test for differences while guarding against bias. Type I error (false positive) and type II error (false negative) are the possible misclassifications. Interpretation of the <i>p</i>-value depends on the assumption that the null hypothesis is true, rather than indicating the probability that the null hypothesis is correct. Misinterpretation of this value remains one of the most persistent errors in medical literature. Sound application of NHST requires deliberate study design, prospective specification of outcomes, and safeguards against multiplicity. Interpretation demands attention to more than statistical thresholds alone, emphasizing effect size, clinical significance, biological plausibility, and study quality. Responsible interpretation also requires distinguishing statistical inference from broader scientific inference, which incorporates prior knowledge and theoretical rationale. Practical considerations and illustrative cases highlight common pitfalls and strategies for improvement. In addition, emerging approaches, including reinterpretation of confidence intervals as compatibility intervals, use of false positive risk, and Bayesian analysis offer potential refinements, though controversies regarding their application remain. Understanding NHST as one component of scientific inference, rather than a definitive arbiter of truth, promotes more thoughtful application and interpretation of evidence. Careful statistical reasoning enhances the quality of research, the reliability of peer review, and the translation of findings into patient care.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145986977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Khoa A. Nguyen, Cary Mobley, Jodi Taylor, Karen Whalen, Casey Rowe, Tracy Leonard, Chris Egan, Elizabeth Aguirre, Michael Outar, Kaitlin M. Alexander
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has fundamentally transformed health care delivery, creating an urgent need to integrate AI education into pharmacy curricula, yet significant implementation challenges persist despite professional organizations establishing frameworks for AI education in health professions. This paper examines the current landscape of AI integration in pharmacy education through a literature review of recent surveys and an analysis of implementation challenges at a single college of pharmacy. Survey data reveal significant knowledge gaps, with approximately half of pharmacy faculty reporting limited AI familiarity and students expressing inadequate preparation for AI use in practice. Key implementation barriers may include a lack of institutional policies, curriculum overload, faculty development needs, varying student AI literacy levels, and challenges keeping pace with rapid technological advancement. Successful AI integration requires establishing a dedicated team with multidisciplinary representation, developing clear AI competencies and student learning outcomes, implementing active learning opportunities with hands-on AI experiences, and maintaining ongoing faculty development and curriculum review processes.
{"title":"Preparing Future Pharmacists for an AI-Enhanced Health Care Environment: Educational Strategies and Implementation Challenges","authors":"Khoa A. Nguyen, Cary Mobley, Jodi Taylor, Karen Whalen, Casey Rowe, Tracy Leonard, Chris Egan, Elizabeth Aguirre, Michael Outar, Kaitlin M. Alexander","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70162","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has fundamentally transformed health care delivery, creating an urgent need to integrate AI education into pharmacy curricula, yet significant implementation challenges persist despite professional organizations establishing frameworks for AI education in health professions. This paper examines the current landscape of AI integration in pharmacy education through a literature review of recent surveys and an analysis of implementation challenges at a single college of pharmacy. Survey data reveal significant knowledge gaps, with approximately half of pharmacy faculty reporting limited AI familiarity and students expressing inadequate preparation for AI use in practice. Key implementation barriers may include a lack of institutional policies, curriculum overload, faculty development needs, varying student AI literacy levels, and challenges keeping pace with rapid technological advancement. Successful AI integration requires establishing a dedicated team with multidisciplinary representation, developing clear AI competencies and student learning outcomes, implementing active learning opportunities with hands-on AI experiences, and maintaining ongoing faculty development and curriculum review processes.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145970012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As accessible health care professionals, pharmacists are increasingly expected to engage with wearable technology, such as with continuous glucose monitors (CGM) and their associated data that are driven by the ongoing digital transformation. However, formal education on CGM data and its interpretation as well as related digital tools is not yet routinely integrated into pharmacy curricula, leaving a gap in students' preparation. The aim of this study was to enhance pharmacy students' competencies and confidence in CGM counseling through targeted training and to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention.
Methods
A 4-h seminar was delivered focusing on CGM data and counseling procedures, including practical examples. Students' performance in CGM-counseling and self-assessment of their CGM competencies were assessed in a pre–post manner using Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) checklists. Additionally, training satisfaction and perceptions of the future integration of wearables and their role in pharmacy practice were captured.
Results
Following the training intervention, pharmacy students demonstrated a significant improvement in their consultation skills, with OSCE increasing from a mean of 19.12 (±7.66) to 63.47 (±12.34) percentage points (p < 0.001). Additionally, participants reported a significantly higher self-assessed performance and expressed notable satisfaction with the module.
Conclusion
Targeted training in CGM counseling significantly improves pharmacy students' competencies specific to CGM data and enhances their confidence in this area. This training prepares students for interpreting CGM data as one example of digital health solutions and wearables. Whether similar training effects extend to other digital health technologies remains to be determined by future research.
{"title":"Enhancing Pharmacy Students' Competencies in Continuous Glucose Monitoring Counseling: An Objective Structured Clinical Examination-Based Training Evaluation","authors":"Florian Kinny, Sabina Schlottau, Stephanie Laeer, Emina Obarcanin","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70163","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>As accessible health care professionals, pharmacists are increasingly expected to engage with wearable technology, such as with continuous glucose monitors (CGM) and their associated data that are driven by the ongoing digital transformation. However, formal education on CGM data and its interpretation as well as related digital tools is not yet routinely integrated into pharmacy curricula, leaving a gap in students' preparation. The aim of this study was to enhance pharmacy students' competencies and confidence in CGM counseling through targeted training and to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A 4-h seminar was delivered focusing on CGM data and counseling procedures, including practical examples. Students' performance in CGM-counseling and self-assessment of their CGM competencies were assessed in a pre–post manner using Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) checklists. Additionally, training satisfaction and perceptions of the future integration of wearables and their role in pharmacy practice were captured.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Following the training intervention, pharmacy students demonstrated a significant improvement in their consultation skills, with OSCE increasing from a mean of 19.12 (±7.66) to 63.47 (±12.34) percentage points (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Additionally, participants reported a significantly higher self-assessed performance and expressed notable satisfaction with the module.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Targeted training in CGM counseling significantly improves pharmacy students' competencies specific to CGM data and enhances their confidence in this area. This training prepares students for interpreting CGM data as one example of digital health solutions and wearables. Whether similar training effects extend to other digital health technologies remains to be determined by future research.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jac5.70163","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145970011","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Inappropriate medications continue to be dispensed to older adults. Deprescribing is an intervention carried out under the supervision of a health care professional, where medications that may cause harm or are no longer beneficial are reduced or withdrawn. Pharmacists play a crucial role in deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications. This systematic review aimed to summarize available evidence regarding the costs and cost-utility of pharmacist-led (or involved) deprescribing interventions for community-dwelling older adults.
Method
A systematic literature search was conducted from inception to June 6, 2025, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central. The titles and abstracts were screened, followed by eligibility assessment of full texts. The quality of studies was appraised using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklists. The cost-utility results were synthesized narratively.
Results
The search strategies identified a total of 3948 records, of which 9 articles were ultimately included in the systematic review based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. All economic evaluations were performed with a time horizon ranging from 6 to 12 months, and in most studies, the outcomes were derived from a single clinical trial. The cost-utility analyses varied, with some strategies being dominant to an incremental cost-utility ratio of €86 360.00 per quality-adjusted life-year.
Conclusions
The cost-utility analyses indicated that pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions are generally a cost-effective option compared with usual care. While these interventions appear promising from an economic standpoint, more long-term, population-based studies are needed to validate these findings
{"title":"Cost-Utility of Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing Interventions for Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review","authors":"Chiranjeev Sanyal, Ronald Watema-Lord, Feng Xie","doi":"10.1002/jac5.70166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.70166","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Inappropriate medications continue to be dispensed to older adults. Deprescribing is an intervention carried out under the supervision of a health care professional, where medications that may cause harm or are no longer beneficial are reduced or withdrawn. Pharmacists play a crucial role in deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications. This systematic review aimed to summarize available evidence regarding the costs and cost-utility of pharmacist-led (or involved) deprescribing interventions for community-dwelling older adults.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A systematic literature search was conducted from inception to June 6, 2025, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central. The titles and abstracts were screened, followed by eligibility assessment of full texts. The quality of studies was appraised using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklists. The cost-utility results were synthesized narratively.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The search strategies identified a total of 3948 records, of which 9 articles were ultimately included in the systematic review based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. All economic evaluations were performed with a time horizon ranging from 6 to 12 months, and in most studies, the outcomes were derived from a single clinical trial. The cost-utility analyses varied, with some strategies being dominant to an incremental cost-utility ratio of €86 360.00 per quality-adjusted life-year.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The cost-utility analyses indicated that pharmacist-led deprescribing interventions are generally a cost-effective option compared with usual care. While these interventions appear promising from an economic standpoint, more long-term, population-based studies are needed to validate these findings</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"9 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jac5.70166","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145970009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号