Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Views of English Pharmacists on Providing Public Health Services
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
U.S. Pharmacist Opinions Regarding the Rescheduling of Hydrocodone Combination Products: A Pilot Study
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Does the Subject Content of the Pharmacy Degree Course Influence the Community Pharmacist’s Views on Competencies for Practice?

Pharmacology Department, Lorraine University, 5 rue Albert Lebrun, 54000 Nancy, France
Pharmacolor Consultants Nancy, 12 rue de Versigny, Villers 54600, France
Department of Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, Brussels 1090, Belgium
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Granada (UGR), Campus Universitario de la Cartuja s/n, Granada 18701, Spain
School of Pharmacy, National and Kapodistrian University Athens, Panepistimiou 30, Athens 10679, Greece
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Tartu, Nooruse 1, Tartu 50411, Estonia
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Helsinki, Yliopistonkatu 4, P.O. Box 33-4, Helsinki 00014, Finland
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, Askerceva cesta 7, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia
Pharmacy Faculty, Jagiellonian University, UL, Golebia 24, Krakow 31-007, Poland
Pharmacy Faculty, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Carol Davila" Bucharest, Dionisie Lupu 37, Bucharest 020021, Romania
European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Lille 2, Lille 59000, France
European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy, Department Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, PO Box 80082, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands
School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
Pharmaceutical Group of the European Union (PGEU), Rue du Luxembourg 19, 1000 Brussels, Belgium
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Pharmacy 2015, 3(3), 137-153;
Submission received: 16 July 2015 / Revised: 10 August 2015 / Accepted: 17 August 2015 / Published: 1 September 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Community Pharmacy)


Do community pharmacists coming from different educational backgrounds rank the importance of competences for practice differently—or is the way in which they see their profession more influenced by practice than university education? A survey was carried out on 68 competences for pharmacy practice in seven countries with different pharmacy education systems in terms of the relative importance of the subject areas chemical and medicinal sciences. Community pharmacists were asked to rank the competences in terms of relative importance for practice; competences were divided into personal and patient-care competences. The ranking was very similar in the seven countries suggesting that evaluation of competences for practice is based more on professional experience than on prior university education. There were some differences for instance in research-related competences and these may be influenced, by education.

1. Introduction

In 1985, the then European Economic Community (EEC) published a directive [1] on pharmacy practice that assumed that pharmacy education in the EEC was broadly comparable and, thus, that the European education system was producing pharmacists with similar competences. In the early 1990s, the European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy (EAFP) [2] questioned these assumptions [3]. EAFP surveyed pharmacy courses in the 11 EEC members and found that although the emphasis in most faculties was on chemical sciences, there was great variability in pharmacy degree courses in the EEC regarding the percentages of time spent on different subjects [4].
At that time it was hoped that European integration would produce greater harmonization in pharmacy education and therefore in competences for practice. In 2011, the PHARMINE (“PHARMacy Education IN Europe”) project [5] revisited this problem. In the 20-year interval between the two studies there was a shift in several countries from chemical to medicinal sciences, albeit, overall variability in degree courses from country to country had not decreased [6]. PHARMINE reflected upon whether differences in pharmacy degrees could be minored by expressing content as competences rather than subjects.
As a follow-up to PHARMINE, a second study, the PHAR-QA (“Quality Assurance in European PHARmacy-Education and Training”) project [7], again funded by the European Commission, asked community pharmacists to rank competences for pharmacy practice.
This paper combines the results of the PHARMINE and PHAR-QA studies. It looks at whether the nature of the degree course (in terms of the relative importance of the subject areas chemical and medicinal sciences taken as an indication of a more “scientific” or a more “clinical” course) has any influence on the way in which community pharmacists ranked the competences they consider are required for practice. The paper evaluates to what extent university education or professional experience can influence the way in which practicing community pharmacists judge their métier and how the balance between these two factors could be altered by the introduction of competence-based education.

2. Experimental Section

In the PHARMINE project, country profiles for pharmacy education and training were drawn up with the help of academics, students, professional pharmacists, and their organizations, as well as representatives of different governmental bodies concerned with pharmacy in the 47 countries of the European Higher Education Area [8]. Amongst others, one of the areas explored in the country profiles was the structure of the pharmacy degree course that was divided into six subject areas: chemical sciences, medicinal sciences, biological sciences, pharmaceutical technology, and law and societal issues. A subject area course index was calculated as: ((percentage of contact hours spent on medicinal subjects/percentage of contact hours spent on chemical subjects) x 100) using data from the PHARMINE study, as given in the 2014 paper on heterogeneity of pharmacy education cited above [6].
In the PHARMINE study, “medicinal subjects” included contact hours in the subjects of anatomy, physiology, medical terminology, pathology, histology, nutrition, pharmacology/pharmacotherapy, toxicology, hematology, immunology, parasitology, hygiene, emergency therapy, non-pharmacological treatment, clinical chemistry/bio-analysis, radiochemistry, dispensing process, drug prescription, prescription analysis (detection of adverse effects and drug interactions), generic drugs, planning, running and interpretation of the data, of clinical trials, medical devices, orthopedics, over the counter medicines, complementary therapy, at-home support and care, skin illness and treatment, homeopathy, phyto-therapy, drugs in veterinary medicine, pharmaceutical care, pharmaceutical therapy of illness, and disease. “Chemical subjects” included contact hours in the subjects of general and inorganic chemistry, medical physico-chemistry, organic chemistry, pharmacopeia analysis, analytical chemistry, and pharmaceutical chemistry including analysis of medicinal products.
Ranking data on competences for practice were taken from the PHAR-QA surveymonkey [9] questionnaire that was available online from 14 January 2014 to 1 November 2014 i.e., 8.5 months. Contacts were made by electronic and other means with the same groups as in the PHARMINE study (see previously). Post hoc analysis of the data allowed the creation of six subgroups: academics, students, community pharmacists, hospital pharmacists, industrial pharmacists, and pharmacists working in other areas. Here we will present the data for community pharmacists; data for other professional categories will be presented elsewhere [10].
The first six questions of the PHAR-QA survey were on the profile of the respondent asking, amongst others, country of residence, current occupation, and duration of activity.
Questions seven through 19 asked about 13 groups of competences with a total of 68 competences (see annex). Questions in groups seven through 11 were concerned with personal competences and in groups 12 through 19 with patient care competences.
Respondents were asked to rank the proposals for competences with a Likert scale:
  • Not important = Can be ignored.
  • Quite important = Valuable but not obligatory.
  • Very important = Obligatory with exceptions depending upon field of pharmacy practice.
  • Essential = Obligatory.
Results are presented in the form of “scores” based on the methodology used in MEDINE2 [11]: score = (frequency rank 3 + frequency rank 4) as % of total frequency. Scores give more granularity and a better pictorial representation than the basic Likert data. Data were obtained from 39 European countries. Data presented here are from the seven European Union member states in which the number of respondents was > 10 (Table 1). Analysis was limited to the European Union as its 28 member states come under the directive on sectoral professions such as pharmacy [12]. One of the annexes of this directive lists the subject areas that are to be taught in the pharmacy degree course in the European Union. Of the 28 member states only seven provided 10 or more community pharmacists respondents.

Statistical Analysis

Results are also expressed as medians with 25 and 75% percentiles; differences among countries were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. All statistics were performed using GraphPad software [13].

3. Results and Discussion

In Table 1 are the medians for duration of practice. Kruskal-Wallace analysis showed a significant effect of country (P = 0.0014) and the Dunn’s multiple comparisons test showed that the duration of practice of the respondents from the Czech Republic was lower than that of respondents from Germany, Ireland or Spain. None of the other comparisons were significant.
Table 1 also shows the medicinal sciences/chemical sciences scores. In Germany the degree course is more “chemical”; in Belgium, the Czech Republic, and Spain the importance of the two subject areas is equal; in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom there is a more “medicinal” course, and this is even more pronounced in Ireland. The medicinal/chemical ratio varies almost four-fold from Germany (0.7) to Ireland (2.6).
Finally, Table 1 shows overall the median rankings for competences (n = 68). The Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant difference amongst countries (P = 0.0006) with a significantly higher median for Spain compared to Belgium, Germany, and Ireland. None of the other multiple comparisons amongst countries reached statistical significance.
Table 1. Characteristics of the seven countries, the medicinal sciences/chemical sciences indices (latter data from the PHARMINE study), and the rankings for competences.
Table 1. Characteristics of the seven countries, the medicinal sciences/chemical sciences indices (latter data from the PHARMINE study), and the rankings for competences.
CountryNumber of respondentsDuration of activity (years; median, 25% and 75% percentiles)Medicinal sciences %Chemical sciences %Medicinal/chemical scoreRanking of competences (median, 25% and 75% percentiles, n = 68)
Czech Republic155/5/1519171.184/67/92
The Netherlands1820/5/2331201.682/57/94
United Kingdom4810/5/2024141.787/59/96
Figure 1 shows the ranking by the seven countries of the 68 competences. This is presented as a radar chart. Radar charts are a useful way to display multivariate observations with an arbitrary number of variables. It allows one to find clusters and also to identify outliers [14]. This radar chart presentation allows an easy overview of the global rankings of competences. It underlines the fact that overall the global rankings by the different countries are similar, with similar highs and lows. This is especially true for the left-hand side of the Figure that represents the rankings for the patient care competences (number 43 through 68). Opinions of the relative importance of such competences appear to be formed by work experience rather than university education. In answer to the question “do community pharmacists coming from different educational backgrounds rank the importance of competences for practice differently” the answer would be no in the case of patient care competences. Examination of Figure 1 shows that the ranking of competences for practice is very similar in seven countries that have different systems of pharmacy education. It should be noted that the ranking score is based on a combination of ranks 3 and 4 that specify that competences are “obligatory”.
Figure 1. Radar chart of the ranking scores (on the central vertical axe, 0%–100%) for the 68 competences (on the circumference) by the seven countries (in different colours). Dotted lines separate the 13 competence groups (see annex) in Figure 1 are given the ranking scores for the 68 competences by the seven countries.
Figure 1. Radar chart of the ranking scores (on the central vertical axe, 0%–100%) for the 68 competences (on the circumference) by the seven countries (in different colours). Dotted lines separate the 13 competence groups (see annex) in Figure 1 are given the ranking scores for the 68 competences by the seven countries.
Pharmacy 03 00137 g001
There are more differences in the right-hand side of the Figure that represents personal competences. Competence 6 is an interesting case. The difference between minimum and maximum for country rankings in group 7 (“personal competences: learning and knowledge”) competence 6 (“ability to design and conduct research using appropriate methodology”) was large (63, see Table A1); Spain, which has a “balanced” course with a medicinal sciences/chemical sciences index of 1.2, ranked highest with 80%. Ireland and the Netherlands which have more “medical” indices of 2.6 and 1.6, respectively, showed the lowest rankings for competence 6: 18 and 17%, respectively. Spain also ranked highest for all competences. In the research-related group 11 (“personal competences: understanding of industrial pharmacy”) Spain scored highest for all 5 competences. Thus differences for Spain may be influenced by education rather than professional experience, albeit, Germany, which has a more “chemical” index (0.7), did not rank competence 6 or the competences in group 11 particularly high.
Several provisos should be added. It is possible that differences in ranking scores are related to duration of practice (i.e., numbers of years since leaving university) rather than to course content. With the median years of practice being significantly different it could very well be that older pharmacists in a given country took a very different course of study 30–40 years ago than younger pharmacists from the same country. Furthermore, it is likely the mix of medicinal/chemical subjects would have differed within countries for participants dependent on when they studied especially as there has been a move towards more medicinal sciences in the past 20 years (see introduction). This cannot be tested, however, as numbers in the different groups do not allow the creation of subgroups based on duration of practice. Some comments can be made on the basis of the existing data. The community pharmacist respondents from the Czech Republic were younger than in several other countries, but the Czech Republic community pharmacists did not show any marked differences with other countries as far as ranking of competences was concerned. Spanish community pharmacists did show a specific pattern of ranking in several groups of competences but their median duration of practice was mid-range.
The conclusion of this paper relies on the fact that the curricula investigated are as different as possible in the relative importance of “medicinal” versus “chemical” sciences component. The seven countries selected were selected on the basis of providing more than 10 respondents. Nonetheless they do represent a significantly wide range of scores. Ireland has the highest value of the 26 European Union member states that have pharmacy departments (1st/26), and Germany the 3rd from the lowest (23rd/26)vi.
The PHARMINE study cited above showed that a competence approach is rarely used in pre-graduate pharmacy education in Europe. There have been several studies on the use of a competence framework to monitor and improve pharmacy practice in a working environment. A study using the general level framework with Singaporean hospital pharmacists showed that all but eight of the 63 behavioral descriptors improved in nine months [15]. A similar study with hospital pharmacists in Queensland showed an improvement in 35 out of 61 competences [16]. Studies have also been conducted in Canada [17]. and elsewhere. The results of all these studies are that competence frameworks are useful tools to monitor and improve performance.

4. Conclusions

This study shows that community pharmacists largely form their opinions on the importance of competences of the basis of work experience rather than university education. The move to harmonize European pharmacy practice expressed in the 1980s seems to have been successful, as judged from the similar way in which community pharmacists from different countries rank competences for practice. However this is less the result of harmonization of pharmacy education that still shows wide diversity.
The short-term perspective of this work is the modification of the existing questionnaire according to the results obtained and the endorsement of the modified version.
The long-term perspective is the introduction of competence-based learning into the university curriculum for pharmacy. This is being discussed in Australia and New Zealand [18] and elsewhere. It now needs to be considered in Europe. Our results suggest that differences in university pharmacy programs are not crucial in the development of specific competencies (at least in the field of community pharmacy, where the majority of pharmacists work). Thus, we do not need a very stringent and tight framework for curricula of pharmacy education. Academia provides graduates with competencies as “novices” (according to five-stage model of competencies proposed by Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1980 [19]). Thus, competence-based learning in universities would provide a sound foundation allowing graduates to gather experience through practical training in the real job environment. Furthermore, academic freedom as to course content should be incorporated into quality assurance of pharmacy education especially when EU directive is “translated” into national frameworks.


With the support of the Lifelong Learning programme of the European Union: 527194-LLP-1-2012-1-BE-ERASMUS-EMCR. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author; the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Author Contributions

Jeffrey Atkinson designed, constructed, ran and analysed the survey and wrote the paper. Kristien De Paepe ran the PHAR-QA consortium. Constantin Mircioiu played a major role in the statistical analyses of the data. Antonio Sánchez Pozo and Dimitrios Rekkas developed the questionnaire. Antonio Sánchez Pozo, Dimitrios Rekkas, Jouni Hirvonen, Borut Bozic, Annie Marcincal and Agnieska Skowron helped with distribution of the survey. Antonio Sánchez Pozo, Daisy Volmer and Kristien De Paepe provided useful criticism and suggestions during revision of the manuscript. Chris van Schravendijk assured the contacts with MEDINE. Jamie Wilkinson played a major role in distributing the survey to community pharmacists.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


Table A1. Ranking of competences by countries.
Table A1. Ranking of competences by countries.
Seq.CompetenceBelgiumCzech RepublicGermanyIrelandSpainThe NetherlandsUnited KingdomMin.Max.Range: max–min.
Group 7. Personal competences: learning and knowledge
11. Ability to identify learning needs and to learn independently (including continuous professional development (CPD)).8310085858594968310017
22. Analysis: ability to apply logic to problem solving, evaluating pros and cons and following up on the solution found.83939292939492839411
33. Synthesis: capacity to gather and critically appraise relevant knowledge and to summarise the key points.83937777938990779316
44. Capacity to evaluate scientific data in line with current scientific and technological knowledge.78677777927879679225
55. Ability to interpret preclinical and clinical evidence-based medical science and apply the knowledge to pharmaceutical practice.63736269928379629231
66. Ability to design and conduct research using appropriate methodology.33293118801736178063
77. Ability to maintain current knowledge of relevant legislation and codes of pharmacy practice.8810075928989937510025
Group 8. Personal competences: values
81. Demonstrate a professional approach to tasks and human relations.928685100100100968510015
92. Demonstrate the ability to maintain confidentiality.1008685100961001008510015
103. Take full personal responsibility for patient care and other aspects of one’s practice.921009292100100100921008
114. Inspire the confidence of others in one’s actions and advice.87798592968896799618
125. Demonstrate high ethical standards.92938592100100988510015
Group 9. Personal competences: communication and organisational skills.
131. Effective communication skills (both orally and written).871009292961001008710013
142. Effective use of information technology.78859285928192789214
153. Ability to work effectively as part of a team.7877928510094987710023
164. Ability to identify and implement legal and professional requirements relating to employment (e.g., for pharmacy technicians) and to safety in the workplace.65757785928881659227
175. Ability to contribute to the learning and training of staff.6585697710081836510035
186. Ability to design and manage the development processes in the production of medicines.52255025762526257651
197. Ability to identify and manage risk and quality of service issues.82856975929483699425
208. Ability to identify the need for new services.62676254855659548531
219. Ability to communicate in English and/or locally relevant languages.52464610077631004610054
2210. Ability to evaluate issues related to quality of service.68466975927590469246
2311. Ability to negotiate, understand a business environment and develop entrepreneurship.61586750816943438137
Group 10. Personal competences: knowledge of different areas of the science of medicines.
241. Plant and animal biology.52626731542735276740
252. Physics.263125827601386052
263. General and inorganic chemistry.57464231465039315726
274. Organic and medicinal/pharmaceutical chemistry.83777569696353538329
285. Analytical chemistry.57466731583833316736
296. General and applied biochemistry (medicinal and clinical).74778346855662468538
307. Anatomy and physiology; medical terminology.96929277968888779619
318. Microbiology.65628354926978549238
329. Pharmacology including pharmacokinetics.9610092100929491911009
3310. Pharmacotherapy and pharmaco-epidemiology.96100929292100858510015
3411. Pharmaceutical technology including analyses of medicinal products.61777558694450447733
3512. Toxicology.96626775698162629634
3613. Pharmacognosy.83855046855046468539
3714. Legislation and professional ethics.91926792858896679629
Group 11. Personal competences: understanding of industrial pharmacy.
381. Current knowledge of design, synthesis, isolation, characterisation and biological evaluation of active substances.584236257572877568
392. Current knowledge of good manufacturing practice (GMP) and of good laboratory practice (GLP).63506425834342258358
403. Current knowledge of European directives on qualified persons (QPs).47405525612027206141
414. Current knowledge of drug registration, licensing and marketing.42674533792757277953
425. Current knowledge of good clinical practice (GCP).74675563794071407939
Group 12. Patient care competences: patient consultation and assessment.
431. Ability to perform and interpret medical laboratory tests.73778367926756569236
442. Ability to perform appropriate diagnostic or physiological tests to inform clinical decision making e.g., measurement of blood pressure.48858377884769478841
453. Ability to recognise when referral to another member of the healthcare team is needed because a potential clinical problem is identified (pharmaceutical, medical, psychological or social).91859292928798859813
Group 13. Patient care competences: need for drug treatment.
461. Retrieval and interpretation of relevant information on the patient's clinical background.91929269889387699324
472. Retrieval and interpretation of an accurate and comprehensive drug history if and when required.10010092859693918510015
483. Identification of non-adherence and implementation of appropriate patient intervention.8610091779293967710023
494. Ability to advise to physicians and—in some cases—prescribe medication.81100918596100968110019
Group 14. Patient care competences: drug interactions.
501. Identification, understanding and prioritisation of drug-drug interactions at a molecular level (e.g., use of codeine with paracetamol).951009210010093878710013
512. Identification, understanding, and prioritisation of drug-patient interactions, including those that preclude or require the use of a specific drug (e.g., trastuzumab for treatment of breast cancer in women with HER2 overexpression).91928392100100938310017
523. Identification, understanding, and prioritisation of drug-disease interactions (e.g., NSAIDs in heart failure).1001009210010010096921008
Group 15. Patient care competences: provision of drug product.
531. Familiarity with the bio-pharmaceutical, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic activity of a substance in the body.82928369918073699222
542. Supply of appropriate medicines taking into account dose, correct formulation, concentration, administration route and timing.10010092921009396921008
553. Critical evaluation of the prescription to ensure that it is clinically appropriate and legal.959292929110096911009
564. Familiarity with the supply chain of medicines and the ability to ensure timely flow of drug products to the patient.76929275879383759318
575. Ability to manufacture medicinal products that are not commercially available.81837333825334338350
Group 16. Patient care competences: patient education.
581. Promotion of public health in collaboration with other actors in the healthcare system.77756777916091609131
592. Provision of appropriate lifestyle advice on smoking, obesity, etc.59835885964793479649
603. Provision of appropriate advice on resistance to antibiotics and similar public health issues.9083829210080988010020
Group 17. Patient care competences: provision of information and service.
611. Ability to use effective consultations to identify the patient's need for information.86929285919398859813
622. Provision of accurate and appropriate information on prescription medicines.100928310091100958310017
633. Provision of informed support for patients in selection and use of non-prescription medicines for minor ailments (e.g., cough remedies...)90928310096100938310017
Group 18. Patient care competences: monitoring of drug therapy.
641. Identification and prioritisation of problems in the management of medicines in a timely manner and with sufficient efficacy to ensure patient safety.901009110091100989010010
652. Ability to monitor and report to all concerned in a timely manner, and in accordance with current regulatory guidelines on Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs), Adverse Drug Events and Reactions (ADEs and ADRs).7082829210073877010030
663. Undertaking of a critical evaluation of prescribed medicines to confirm that current clinical guidelines are appropriately applied.71808285919382719322
Group 19. Patient care competences: evaluation of outcomes.
671. Assessment of outcomes on the monitoring of patient care and follow-up interventions.78806085907387609030
682. Evaluation of cost effectiveness of treatment.53803025677378258055
Seq.: sequential numbering (as in Figure 1); Min.: minimum; Max.: maximum; Note that the numbering of the groups of competences starts at 7, i.e., after the 6 questions on profile.


  1. The European Union. The Council Directive of 16 September 1985 concerning the coordination of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in respect of certain activities in the field of pharmacy. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  2. European Association of Faculties of Pharmacy (EAFP). Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  3. The European Union. ERASMUS Subject Evaluations: Summary Reports of the Evaluation Conferences by Subject Area. Volume 1 pharmacy. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  4. BERLIN Humboldt University. 2nd European meetings of the faculties, schools and institutes of pharmacy. 27 September 1994. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  5. Pharmine: pharmacy education in Europe. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  6. Atkinson, J. Heterogeneity of pharmacy education in Europe. Pharmacy 2014, 2, 231–243. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. PHAR-QA. The PHAR-QA project: Quality Assurance in European Pharmacy Education and Training. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  8. Bologna Process-European Higher Education Area. History. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  9. Surveymonkey survey creation system. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  10. Atkinson, J.; De Paepe, K.; Sánchez Pozo, A.; Rekkas, D.; Volmer, D.; Hirvonen, J.; Bozic, B.; Skowron, A.; Mircioiu, C.; Marcincal, A.; Koster, A.; Wilson, K.; van Schravendijk, C. The PHAR-QA project: Quality Assurance in European Pharmacy Education and Training. Results of the Eur. Netw. Delphi. 2015, in press. [Google Scholar]
  11. Marz, R.; Dekker, F.W.; Van Schravendijk, C.; O’Flynn, S.; Ross, M.T. Tuning research competences for Bologna three cycles in medicine: Report of a MEDINE2 European consensus survey. Perp. Med. Educ. 2013. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015). [Google Scholar]
  12. European University Association (EUA). EUA Briefing Note on Directive 2013/55/EU, containing the amendments to Directive 2005/36/EC on the Recognition of Professional Qualifications. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  13. GraphPad statistical pack. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015).
  14. Chambers, J.; Cleveland, W.; Kleiner, B.; Tukey, P. Graphical Methods for Data Analysis. J. Appl. Stat. 1984, 11, 233–234. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rutter, V.; Wong, C.; Coombes, I.; Cardiff, L.; Duggan, C.; Yee, M.-L.; Lim, K.W.; Bates, I. Use of a General Level Framework to Facilitate Performance Improvement in Hospital Pharmacists in Singapore. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2012, 76, 1–10. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Coombes, I.; Avent, M.; Cardiff, L.; Bettenay, K.; Coombes, J.; Whitfield, K.; Stokes, J.; Davies, G.; Bates, I. Improvement in Pharmacist’s Performance Facilitated by an Adapted Competency-Based General Level Framework. J. Pharm. Pract. Res. 2010, 40, 111–118. Available online: (accessed on 28 August 2015). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Winslade, N.E.; Tamblyn, R.M.; Taylor, L.K.; Schuwirth, L.W.T.; Van der Vleuten, C.P.M. Integrating Performance Assessment, Maintenance of Competence, and Continuing Professional Development of Community Pharmacists. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2007, 71, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Stupans, I.; McAllister, S.; Clifford, R.; Hughes, J.; Krasse, I.; March, G.; Owen, S.; Woulf, J. Nationwide collaborative development of learning outcomes and exemplar standards for Australian pharmacy programmes. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2014, 24, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Dreyfus, S.E.; Dreyfus, H.L. A Five-Stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in Directed Skill Acquisition; Storming Media: Washington, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Atkinson, J.; De Paepe, K.; Pozo, A.S.; Rekkas, D.; Volmer, D.; Hirvonen, J.; Bozic, B.; Skowron, A.; Mircioiu, C.; Marcincal, A.; et al. Does the Subject Content of the Pharmacy Degree Course Influence the Community Pharmacist’s Views on Competencies for Practice? Pharmacy 2015, 3, 137-153.

AMA Style

Atkinson J, De Paepe K, Pozo AS, Rekkas D, Volmer D, Hirvonen J, Bozic B, Skowron A, Mircioiu C, Marcincal A, et al. Does the Subject Content of the Pharmacy Degree Course Influence the Community Pharmacist’s Views on Competencies for Practice? Pharmacy. 2015; 3(3):137-153.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Atkinson, Jeffrey, Kristien De Paepe, Antonio Sánchez Pozo, Dimitrios Rekkas, Daisy Volmer, Jouni Hirvonen, Borut Bozic, Agnieska Skowron, Constantin Mircioiu, Annie Marcincal, and et al. 2015. "Does the Subject Content of the Pharmacy Degree Course Influence the Community Pharmacist’s Views on Competencies for Practice?" Pharmacy 3, no. 3: 137-153.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop