Educational Background and Academic Rank of Faculty Members within US Schools of Pharmacy

Objectives. Pharmacy education is rapidly changing with an expansion in the number and size of colleges/schools of pharmacy (COP) and increasing expectations for scholarship. However, manuscript publication rates of AACP abstracts is not known. The aim of this study was to examine trends in manuscript publication rates for abstracts presented at the 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015 AACP annual meetings.Methods. Manuscript publication of AACP abstracts was determined through a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. 'New' COPs were defined as receiving accreditation after 1996.Contingency tables and t-tests were applied; p value<0.05 was considered significant.Results. 1382 abstracts were evaluated. The overall publication rate was 20% and there was no difference in publication rates over 15 years. Conclusions. The publication rate of AACP abstracts has remained steady, despite the increase in COPs and faculty. Collaboration amongst institutions was the strongest predictor for publication, highlighting its importance. The low publication rate observed may be attributed to a lack of training for junior faculty, insufficient forums to publish work, or misaligned motivations for scholarship among faculty. These barriers should be examined further.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

Predictors of Publication Rates for Abstracts Presented at the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Annual Meetings

Spencer

Majkowski

Suda

2018

“…These results are slightly lower than those observed overall for faculty in 2013. 2 Differences in the time frame for graduating and becoming a faculty member versus rising into a chair or dean position might account for the difference. It is unknown whether the driving force for the observed trends in employment stemmed from personal career goals to serve as leaders at their alma mater, institutional preferences to promote from within, or inability or unwillingness to move to a different geographic location.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Between 2004 and 2014, the number with full accreditation or candidate status increased by 50%, from 86 to 129. 1,2 This proliferation in new programs poses potential challenges, including the recruitment and retention of qualified faculty and leadership teams. 3 Recently, Assemi and colleagues 2 characterized the educational background and degrees of faculty members at US pharmacy schools.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Attainment and Academic Profile of Deans and Chairs at US Pharmacy Schools

Assemi

Liu

et al. 2017

Self Cite

Objective. To characterize educational attainment and experiences of current US pharmacy school deans and chairs. Methods. A cross-sectional study using a publicly available listing of accredited schools and information. Results. Among 134 deans and 301 chairs, 79.9% and 65.5% held a professional degree (BSPharm and/or PharmD), 33.6% and 26.2% completed PGY-1 residencies, 12.7% and 15.6% completed post-PharmD fellowships, 23.1% and 33.9% completed post-doctoral fellowships, and 13.4% and 18.3% held BPS certification, respectively. Fewer than 1 in 5 were employed at an alma mater. Ninety (20.7%) deans and chairs completed AACP's Academic Leadership Fellows Program. Average current tenure was 5.7 and 5.1 years for deans and chairs, respectively. Conclusion. The majority of deans and chairs held a pharmacy professional degree and the prevalence of postgraduate educational and leadership training is increasing. Future research should apply mixed methods to investigate educational attainment and employment experience of deans and chairs, institutional hiring trends, and how these characteristics compare between newer and established programs.

“…Faculty researchers come from different training backgrounds (eg, primary training in clinical practice via a Doctor of Pharmacy program and subsequent post-doctoral training such as residencies; primary training in education; primary training in research via a PhD program; or mixed training such as a PharmD/PhD dual-degree). 9 Therefore, the design of structural support for career development in research must account for such heterogeneity. Looking across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) career development (K) awards provides the perspective of a national funding agency regarding the different trajectories available to faculty of varied training backgrounds, including postdoctoral and early career research scientists, teacher-investigators, and clinician-scientists.…”

Section: Identification Of Necessary Skills For Research Leadership Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

Report of the 2018-2019 Research and Graduate Affairs Committee

O’Donnell

Anand

Brown

et al. 2019

The 2018-2019 Research and Graduate Affairs Committee (RGAC) was charged with critically evaluating the leadership development support necessary for pharmacy researchers, including postdoctoral trainees, to develop the skills needed to build and sustain successful research programs and analyzing how well those needs are being met by existing programs both within AACP and at other organizations. The RGAC identified a set of skills that could reasonably be expected to provide the necessary foundation to successfully lead a research team and mapped these skills to the six domains of graduate education in the pharmaceutical sciences established by the 2016-2017 RGAC (Table 1). In addition, the RGAC identified competency in team science and the bench-to-bedside-to-beyond translational spectrum as being critical elements of research leadership. The universality of these skills and their value prompted the RGAC to make two related recommendations to AACP: Recommendation 1: AACP should promote the development and use of strategies to ensure intentional and ongoing professional development, such as Individual Development Plans. Recommendation 2: AACP should explore collaborative research leadership development opportunities between faculty at research-intensive institutions and faculty at non-research-intensive institutions. The RGAC also examined programs available at AACP and other national organizations that could help pharmacy faculty develop foundational skills for research leadership (Table 2). The RGAC administered two surveys, one to administrators responsible for research at colleges and schools of pharmacy and one to faculty members at pharmacy schools, to gather information about training needs, programming and support available for research leadership development. Administrators and faculty agreed that research is important for career advancement for faculty, and almost all administrators reported their schools provide funds, release time and mentoring for participation in research career development. However, a lack of faculty awareness regarding programs and available support may be a barrier to participation. The RGAC therefore makes two recommendations and one suggestion related to AACP programming: Recommendation 3: AACP should expand research leadership development opportunities building from existing programs such as ALFP and AACP Catalyst, with consideration placed on developing programs that promote collaborative research. Recommendation 4: AACP should collaborate with other professional organizations to expand research leadership development opportunities across the academy. Suggestion 1: Colleges and schools of pharmacy should take a proactive role in promoting and facilitating research leadership development for faculty.