EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 19 / Numéro 2 (Mai 2018) Pédagogie Médicale, 19 2 (2018) 65-76 References
Free Access
Issue
Pédagogie Médicale
Volume 19, Number 2, Mai 2018
Page(s) 65 - 76
Section Recherche et Perspectives
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/pmed/2019013
Published online 17 juillet 2019
  1. Martin LC, Donohoe KL, Holdford DA. Decision-making and problem-solving approaches in pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ 2016;80:52. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Vass C, Gray E, Payne K. Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: A systematic review. Int J Clin Pharm 2016;38:620‐30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Toklu HZ, Hussain A. The changing face of pharmacy practice and the need for a new model of pharmacy education. J Young Pharm 2013;5:38‐40. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Naik-Panvelkar P, Armour C, Saini B. Discrete choice experiments in pharmacy: A review of the literature. Int J Pharm Pract 2013;21:3‐19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Duffett M, Choong K, Vanniyasingam T, Thabane L, Cook DJ. Making decisions about medications in critically ill children: A survey of Canadian pediatric critical care clinicians. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2015;16:21‐8. [Google Scholar]
  6. Tracy CS, Dantas GC, Moineddin R, Upshur RE. Contextual factors in clinical decision making: national survey of Canadian family physicians. Can Fam Physician 2005;51:1106‐7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bjornson DC. Interpretation of drug risk and benefit: Individual and population perspectives. Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:694‐9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Université de Montréal. Faculté de pharmacie. Doctorat de premier cycle en pharmacie. Disponible sur https://pharm.umontreal.ca/etudes/premier-cycle/doctorat-de-premier-cycle-en-pharmacie-pharm-d/#c67161. [Google Scholar]
  9. Université de Montréal, Faculté de pharmacie, Doctorat professionnel en pharmacie. Disponible sur https://pharm.umontreal.ca/etudes/cycles-superieurs/maitrise-en-pharmacotherapie-avancee/. [Google Scholar]
  10. Charlin B, Bordage G, Van Der Vleuten C. L’évaluation du raisonnement clinique. Pédagogie Médicale 2003;4:42‐52. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  11. Srinivasan M, Wilkes M, Stevenson F, Nguyen T, Slavin S. Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. Acad Med 2007;82:74‐82. [Google Scholar]
  12. Lambert de Cursay C, Lebel D, Bussières JF. Caractéristiques reliées au choix dans le domaine de la santé et applicabilité en pratique pharmaceutique hospitalière. Journal de Pharmacie Clinique 2019;38:37‐46. [Google Scholar]
  13. Lambert de Cursay C, Lebel D, Savard AM, Roy A, Bussières JF. Prévalence du terme raisonnable et de termes apparentés dans les textes juridiques et normatifs applicables à l’exercice de la pharmacie. Pharmactuel 2018;51:246‐52 + annexe 1:1-4. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ordre des pharmaciens du Québec. Guide d’application des standards de pratique. Évaluer les ordonnances et analyser la situation. Disponible sur http://guide.standards.opq.org/guides/evaluer-les-ordonnances-et-analyser-la-situation. [Google Scholar]
  15. Allan GM, Lexchin J, Wiebe N. Physician awareness of drug cost: A systematic review. PLoS Med 2007;4:e283. [Google Scholar]
  16. Schutte T, Tichelaar J, Nanayakkara P, Richir M, van Agtmael M. Students and doctors are unaware of the cost of drugs they frequently prescribe. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2017;120:278‐83. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Al-Dahir S, Bryant K, Kennedy KB, Robinson DS. Online virtual-patient cases versus traditional problem-based learning in advanced pharmacy practice experiences. Am J Pharm Educ 2014;78:76. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Shirneshan E, Kyrychenko P, Matlin OS, Avila JP, Brennan TA, Shrank WH. Impact of a transition to more restrictive drug formulary on therapy discontinuation and medication adherence. J Clin Pharm Ther 2016;41:64‐9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Happe LE, Clark D, Holliday E, Young T. A systematic literature review assessing the directional impact of managed care formulary restrictions on medication adherence, clinical outcomes, economic outcomes, and health care resource utilization. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2014;20:677‐84. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Nguyen E, Weeda ER, Sobieraj DM, Bookhart BK, Piech CT, Coleman CI. Impact of non-medical switching on clinical and economic outcomes, resource utilization and medication-taking behavior: A systematic literature review. Curr Med Res Opin 2016;32:1281‐90. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Park Y, Raza S, George A, Agrawal R, Ko J. The effect of formulary restrictions on patient and payer outcomes: A systematic literature review. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2017;23:893‐901. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Régie de l’Assurance-maladie du Québec. Montant à payer pour les médicaments. 2017. Disponible sur http://www.ramq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/citoyens/assurance-medicaments/Pages/montant-a-payer-medicaments.aspx. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lambert de Cursay C, Lebel D, Bussières JF. Évaluation du niveau d’aise d’une cohorte d’internes en pharmacie exposée à une simulation portant sur la validation des ordonnances. Le Pharmacien Hospitalier et Clinicien 2019;54:13‐8. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Legris MÈ, Séguin NC, Desforges K, Sauvé P, Lord A, Bell R et al. Pharmacist web-based training program on medication use in chronic kidney disease patients: Impact on knowledge, skills, and satisfaction. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2011;31:140‐50. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Battaglia JN, Kieser MA, Bruskiewitz RH, Pitterle ME, Thorpe JM. An online virtual-patient program to teach pharmacists and pharmacy students how to provide diabetes-specific medication therapy management. Am J Pharm Educ 2012;76:131. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Spurling GK, Mansfield PR, Montgomery BD, Lexchin J, Doust J, Othman N et al. Information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians’ prescribing: A systematic review. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000352. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.