Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mcghan, W. F.
Right arrow Articles by Segal, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mcghan, W. F.
Right arrow Articles by Segal, J. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Pharmacists as Drug Prescribers

Validation of Certification Exams and Evaluation Instruments

William F. Mcghan

Glen L. Stimmel

Thomas M. Gilman

University of Southern California, School of Pharmacy

Jack L. Segal

Veterans Administration Medical Center

The purpose of this article is to discuss the validit l and reliabilit y of 'certification tests and evaluation instruments for pharmacists as drug prescribers. Under California Law AB 717, the University of'Southern California is operating one of two pilot programs to train and evaluate prescribing iharmacists. Various instruments have heen created and administered, and validity results are presented. The presentation is organized into two areas dealing with the development of' the examination instrumient and then the assessment of'the prescriptions written by pharmacists. The reliability of' the three sections of the certification examination as mneasured hi internal consistencyl was as fbllows: clinical therapeutics (KR 20=.84), physical assessment (KR 20 =.88), and law (KR 20= .84). The exam was given to a group of physicians (N = 14) to establish a cutting score. Thirty pharmacists who took the exam didslightlY better than the phi sicians on clinical therapeutics, but the ph} vsicians perfornied better than pharmacists on physical assessment (p <.01). A prescription evaluation form was (constructed to evaluate the performance of the pharmacists as prescribers. The reliability of the form as measured b y (coej, ficient alpha was .84. Concurrent validit Y was explored bY assessing the relationship between perfbrmance on the certification exam and judges' appropriateness scores on prescriptions for ambulator he pertensive patients. These results indicate that the pharmacists, who passed the exam, can prescribe as appropriatelY as physicians.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 5, No. 2, 115-129 (1982)
DOI: 10.1177/016327878200500201
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?