Mixed-methods research identifies essential core concepts for Australian pharmacy education to enhance learning outcomes.
Background Pharmacy education lacks a standard list of core concepts (CCs) that students must understand and apply across all disease contexts to optimise medication use for treatment, prevention, and management (pharmacotherapy). In Australia, while professional competencies for pharmacotherapy are outlined, CCs remain unidentified. Evidence from over 25 higher-education fields shows CCs effectively prioritise content, guide curriculum development, and foster meaningful learning. This study aims to identify and reach consensus on the CCs of pharmacotherapy that pharmacy students should master during initial training in Australia. Method A biphasic mixed-methods research design was employed. In Phase 1, a comprehensive list of potential CCs was developed using a qualitative, multimethod approach that included document analysis via text mining of pharmacotherapy textbooks and brainstorming sessions with pharmacotherapy experts in Australia. In Phase 2, a two-round modified Delphi was employed to evaluate potential CCs, using five predefined criteria and the level of agreement among experts. Results Phase 1 identified 36 terms across 4 categories, with 7 excluded as skills or professional activities, leaving 29 potential CCs. Phase 2 established 21 CCs, with a consensus of over 85% among pharmacotherapy educators from seven Australian pharmacy schools. The CCs that achieved unanimous agreement were 16, such as medication-related problems, while 5 CCs, like concentration-effect relationships, reached 88% consensus. Conclusion While grounded in the Australian context, the findings have potential transferability for pharmacy educators in other contexts, as these CCs serve as pedagogical tools that facilitate content prioritisation amid curriculum overload and foster the acquisition of conceptual understanding for adaptive expertise. We propose that educators utilise these CCs in their instruction and curriculum development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Etukakpan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: