1

Student Syllabus

Phar 6742: Evidence-based Problem Analysis (EPA): Part 1 (of 2)

Spring 2018

1.0 Credit

Syllabus is subject to change. Students will be informed of any revisions.

Meeting Times & Locations

Day Time Duluth Room Twin Cities Room

Fridays 10:10-12:05 165 LSci Moos 1-450

Note: Please check Moodle for current information on class meetings frequently as it is subject to change.

Course Instructional Team

Twin Cities Duluth

Course Directors

Dr. Serguei Pakhomov

Professor Department of Pharmaceutical Care &

Health Systems

7-125F Weaver-Densford Hall 308 Harvard Street SE Minneapolis, MN 55455 Phone: 612-624-1198

Email pakh0002@umn.edu

Dr. Jon N. Rumbley Assistant Professor Dept. of Pharmacy Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences University of Minnesota-Duluth 127 LSci 1110 Kirby Dr. Duluth, MN 55812 Phone: 218-726-6047 email: jrumbley@d.umn.edu

Teaching Assistants

Josh Shirley (shirl033@umn.edu) Caitlin Jokipii Krueger (purox003@umn.edu)

Jenny Nguyen (nguy1699@d.umn.edu)

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Meeting Times & Locations 1

COURSE OVERVIEW 3

Course Goals 4

Learning Objectives 4

Rules for Using Primary Research Data in EPA 4

Connections to Prior Learning 5

General Course Expectations 5

COURSE SCHEDULE 6

ASSESSMENT & GRADING 11

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 13

Grading 13

Attendance Policy 13

Honor Code 13

Technology Requirements and Help 14

Course Materials 14

APPENDIX 16

Final Paper Required Format 17

MEMO to COP Faculty: Using Results of Primary Research 20

EPA1 Using Primary Research Data - Learning Contract 22

3

COURSE OVERVIEW

This course is part of a two-semester series.

End Product ● Students in EPA will be required to conduct a research project that will answer a pharmacy-related question by using scientific evidence obtained from a systematic review of published literature. The end product of the course series is a brief paper based on a pharmacy topic of the student's’ choosing. The writing of this paper occurs over two consecutive semesters.

● Spring Semester (EPA 1): Write a brief project Proposal and the Methods section (form an answerable question, begin to acquire, appraise and apply evidence to answer the question; in Proposal, state the research question(s) and the rationale for investigating the question; in Methods, describe in detail how the evidence to answer the question was and will be acquired).

● Fall Semester (EPA 2): Continue collecting evidence and write a draft of the final paper reporting the results, receive and respond to feedback from faculty advisor(s), revise and submit the final paper for evaluation, and present findings to an audience or peers and faculty.

The final paper MUST be based on a systematic review of scientific literature. The paper may include primary data but only as ADDITIONAL evidence (see Primary Research section below for details).

Changing a research paper topic after submission of the Proposal requires documented Course Director permission.

Changing a faculty advisor after submission of the Proposal requires Course documented Director permission.

Attendance & Participation

● Students are expected to come to class fully prepared to participate in class discussions by reading assigned articles and viewing assigned presentations prior to class sessions.

Passing the course

● Students must successfully complete each section of the course to move on to the next section and ultimately pass the course. There are several required but not graded assignments in this course – these must be completed in order to pass.

Research Paper Grades

● COP faculty will evaluate student deliverables (Proposal, Methods, Final Paper) using rubrics published on the course Moodle site and discussed in class.

● Each paper (draft and final) will be reviewed by one faculty reviewer. ● Other course assignments are graded by TAs, course director and faculty.

Primary Research

● In addition to evidence obtained from the systematic review of literature, projects may OPTIONALLY include evidence based on primary data collection and analysis. Primary data may ONLY be used to support/strengthen (or refute) findings obtained from the systematic review of literature – primary data analysis may NOT be used as a substitute for systematic literature review.

● Primary data (e.g. medical records, tissue samples, surveys, etc.) collection requires considerable time and effort that may take more than 1-2 semesters.

4

Furthermore, analysis of primary data requires in-depth knowledge of biostatistics and skills in using analytical software and/or services of a biostatistician. In-depth training on primary data collection, biostatistics and analytical services are outside of the scope of the EPA sequence. Students wishing to collect and analyze primary data are strongly encouraged to consult with course directors and their faculty advisors in order to determine the feasibility of any efforts involving primary data prior to initiating their projects.

Course Goals

1. Foster problem-solving skills in students by gaining first-hand experience with scientific research 2. Illustrate how systematic literature review is relevant to the generalist practitioner 3. Enable students to construct a research question relevant to pharmacy practice and use evidence

and/or data to answer the question in a reliable and reproducible fashion 4. Communicate the answer/findings to the research question in a convincing, succinct and effective

manner to an audience of peers

Learning Objectives

1. Explain how practice-based problem analysis with evidence-based methods can help pharmacists improve patient care.

2. Identify a problem in clinical or scientific practice, formulate a well-constructed question that will frame/guide investigations and determine the methods to respond to or investigate the question.

3. Utilize established methods for identifying, selecting, appraising, and applying literature in response to a defined question.

4. Formulate brief and effective written communications to describe problems and solutions to peers.

5. Demonstrate an ability to effectively verbally present the problem and solutions to peers. 6. Provide effective peer-review.

Rules for Using Primary Research Data in EPA

Students who have an established research relationship with a faculty member may choose to complete their research paper under the mentorship of that faculty member – provided the faculty agrees to mentor the student. Student and faculty mentor will sign a contract to document this commitment (see Appendix).

Notes on primary research option for FACULTY ADVISERS:

● Students MUST perform a systematic review of the existing literature on their chosen topic to determine the state-of-the-art with respect to their research question. This must be done PRIOR to analyzing primary data.

● The faculty advisor is FULLY responsible for complying with all, safety, regulatory and ethics requirements at the University of Minnesota including, but not limited to, ensuring that appropriate approvals have been obtained for any research requiring human subjects or animals and supervising the student in data acquisition and analysis.

● Students attend classes and complete assignments as described in the syllabus. ● Faculty mentors will assess and submit grades for student mentees at established course

milestones.

5

Connections to Prior Learning

Students will apply the acquiring and appraising they learned in: ● PHAR 6700-Becoming a Pharmacist, ● PHAR 6704- Foundations of Social & Administrative Pharmacy (SAPh) ● PHAR 6706-Foundations of Pharmaceutical Care.

Depending upon the nature of the project ultimately selected by the student, the student may apply the statistics skills they developed in:

● PHAR 6704- Foundations of Social & Administrative Pharmacy (SAPh), and/or the drug or patient care-related knowledge they obtained in their pharmacy courses prior to this course.

Finally, students will apply writing skills - including punctuation and grammar - that they learned in their pre-pharmacy and earlier pharmacy courses, and apply the skills they learned in these earlier courses to organize a scholarly or scientific paper.

General Course Expectations

Students in EPA will be expected to:

1. Continuously self-assess any gaps or weaknesses in his/her knowledge and skills related to the course and fill these gaps (a.k.a. “catch up”) independently or by pro-actively seeking help and resources available at the University of Minnesota (e.g., the UMN Writing Center). This expectation is particularly important for students that do not have a strong academic writing background.

2. Obtain course-related information (e.g. expectations for assignments, etc.) directly from Course Directors or Course TAs. Students are strongly discouraged from relying on information obtained from College of Pharmacy students in senior PD years, as the course requirements and expectations change from year to year. Information obtained from students in other PD years may be obsolete or inaccurate.

3. Develop/Demonstrate the ability to work independently with minimal supervision and to identify and take advantage of the resources provided by the University of Minnesota (e.g. Writing Center (http://writing.umn.edu/) services, UMN Library services, individual faculty consultations, etc.).

4. Be pro-active in engaging with faculty advisors. The advisors are expected to work with students and help them to the best of their ability; however, it is the student’s responsibility to maintain contact with their advisors, schedule meetings and keep track of deadlines.

6

COURSE SCHEDULE

See Moodle for weekly details*

Class Agenda/Topics Activities / Assignments / Assessments

Week 1

(Jan 12)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

INTRODUCTION TO

COURSE

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Faculty presentation on overview of EPA sequence.

Activity: go over the Syllabus expectations and requirements

Assessment 1: Quiz on course expectations

Activity: Begin to examine the anatomy of a student research paper and

establish expectations. Read 2 research papers from a previous year and

identify key elements: motivation, research question, hypotheses, methods,

supporting evidence, tables and figures, synthesis of information. Discuss

strengths and weaknesses.

Assignment (due next class): Read 2 of the 4 professional literature reviews

(Moodle). Everyone MUST read the AJPE article in

Professional_SysRev_4.pdf document. The second article can be selected

from the remaining 3 based on personal preference. Be prepared to identify

key elements and discuss strengths and weaknesses of the AJPE article in

class. Use the rubric that will be eventually used by the faculty to evaluate your

final paper (posted on Moodle).

Week 2

(Jan 19)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

DEVELOPING

RESEARCH

QUESTIONS

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Activity: Group discussion (using rubric) of the assignment from previous class

– key elements and strengths and weaknesses. 2 students will be called upon

at random to present to the whole class.

Assessment 2: Quiz on elements of a systematic literature review.

Activity: Open discussion of the relevance of secondary research (i.e.,

systematic lit review) to the practice of pharmacy.

Faculty presentation on developing answerable research questions

Activity: Work in groups to develop good (and bad) research questions and

ideas for gathering necessary background information. Dynamed for clinical-

type questions, a search of Pubmed limited to “systematic reviews” for all

questions, textbooks included in AccessMedicine for clinical questions

Assignment (due next class): Develop 2-3 research questions that meet the

following criteria:

a) relevant to pharmacy

7

b) personally relevant

c) cannot be answered quickly or by simply examining a single source for

factual information

Conduct a preliminary search using Google on each of the questions to

determine availability and quantity of existing research. Be prepared to present

the questions and preliminary results in class.

Week 3

(Jan 26)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

LITERATURE

SEARCH

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov and

Frank Sayre (UMN

library)

Duluth: Rumbley

Activity: Group discussion of research questions and preliminary search results

from previous week. Select the best of 3 topics. 2-3 students will be called upon

at random to present to the whole class.

Assessment 3: Quiz on key characteristics of good and bad research

questions.

Faculty presentation: Presentation on the size, complexity, and organization

of health science literature, how to select resources to answer your questions,

and the difference between clinical and research searching. Overivew of

Pubmed/Medline through pubmed.gov and Ovid Medline. Overview of how to

search for gray literature.

Activity: Students work in groups to define search terms and perform

something they are interested in, using several databases and methods, with a

focus on literature types

Assignment: Practice defining search queries and performing searching via

Ovid or PubMed for the best selected topic from the Group Discussion activity.

Be prepared to explain and defend your search strategy in class.

Week 4

(Feb 2)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

LITERATURE

SEARCH

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov and

Frank Sayre (UMN

library)

Duluth: Welage

Activity: Students work in groups to present to each other and defend their

search strategy for the selected topic. 2-3 students will be called upon at

random to present to the whole class.

Assessment 4: Quiz on literature searching.

Assignment: Search for “systematic reviews” on PubMed on a topic of your

choosing and read 1-2 review article(s) resulting from the search. If no results,

modify the topic or select something else of interest until you find a review to

read. Be prepared to describe and discuss the author’s search strategy.

Week 5

(Feb 9)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

ORGANIZING

SEARCH RESULTS

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov and

Frank Sayre

Duluth: Welage

Activity: All-class discussion of search strategies used in 1-2 Cochrane reviews

articles.

Faculty presentation on using citation managers (Mendeley and Zotero)

Activity: Write And Cite: Group exercise on creating a bibliography using a

citation manager. Select 5 published papers to cite. Import into reference

8

manager. Set the output format to APA. Generate Reference list. Set output to

MLA format. Generate Reference list. Export citations from RefWorks to Zotero

and vice versa.

Assessment 5: Quiz on bibliography and citation managers

Assignment: Prepare and submit on Moodle the most viable research

question, search strategy and bibliography you have so far. 2-3 submissions will

be selected at random for in-class discussion.

Feb 13 12pm-4:30pm

(Location TBA) RESEARCH DAY – please be sure to attend! See Moodle for activity

suggestions.

Week 6

(Feb 16)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

RESEARCH TOPIC

DEVELOPMENT

WORKSHOP

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Faculty demonstration: Working with a collection of over 4500 questions

asked by patients as a source of a research topic. Practice converting

questions into PICO statements.

Activity: Examine a collection of clinical questions that patients ask in

medical_questions_all_collections.xlsx file. Select 2-3 questions and turn them

into PICO format.

Activity: Students discuss their possible research questions in groups of 4-6

people. The objective is to obtain feedback from classmates on selecting,

refining and revising the research question. Faculty and TAs will hold individual

and group consultations throughout the class period.

Week 7

(Feb 23)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

STUDY DESIGNS

PRIMER

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Faculty presentation: on major study designs discussed in the literature

evaluation course and their strengths and weaknesses. Discussion of levels of

evidence and criteria used to determine the strength of evidence (e.g.,

PRISMA)

Activity: Work in groups to apply levels of evidence rules to 3-4 scientific

articles selected by students for their topics.

Week 8

(March 2)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

RESEARCH

PROPOSAL

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Welage

Faculty presentation:

Review of well-constructed questions and instruction on writing a research

proposal and how to evaluate it.

Activity: Start formulating a research proposal by outlining:

a) Overall research question and rationale for pursuing it

b) Specific hypotheses and methods

c) Anticipated results and their significance

Assessment 6 (due Week 9): Quiz on study designs

Assignment: Develop a rough draft 1-1.5 page research proposal and be

prepared to present it to classmates.

9

Week 9

(March 9)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

PROVIDING

CONSTRUCTIVE

FEEDBACK

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Faculty presentation on how to provide constructive feedback and how to

survive harsh criticism

Activity: Present your draft of research proposal to classmates in groups to

get feedback.

Assessment 7 (due Week 12): Submit a refined project proposal on Moodle

for evaluation and feedback.

Assignment: Schedule a meeting with your faculty adviser in the next 2

weeks to present your research project proposal and receive feedback.

March 12 –

16: Spring

break

Week 10

(March 23)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

Research

Day

RESEARCH

PROPOSAL

WORKSHOP

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov and

Sayre

Duluth: Hager

Activity: Present the research proposal to classmates in groups. Faculty and

TA’s provide individual consultations.

Assessment 8 (due Week 11): Provide peer-feedback on 3 randomly

assigned proposals from classmates.

Week 11

(March 30)

TC in WDH

7-135;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

RESEARCH

PROPOSAL

WORKSHOP

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth:

Rumbley/Welage

Activity: Students work individually or in groups to address feedback from

peers and faculty. Course directors will discuss select cases and provide

individual consultations.

Week 12

(April 6)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

REPORTING SYSTEMATIC LIT REVIEW METHODS AND RESULTS

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Welage

Faculty presentation: on how to present the methods used for systematic

literature review. Discussion of Table 1 (search flow).

Activity: Students practice creating Figure 1 based on their own search results

and Table 1 based on already extracted data.

Assessment 9: (due Week 14): Write and submit on Moodle the Proposal and

Methods sections for initial review. This deliverable should also contain Table 1

and all references.

Required Assignment: Schedule a meeting with faculty advisor in the next 2

weeks to receive feedback.

Week 13 METHODS Activity: Students work individually or in groups on writing the Methods section

10

* Subject to change at course instructor’s discretion. In particular, the instructors and activities for each class

session may change as the course progresses. We will inform students of any changes as soon as possible.

(April 13)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

WORKSHOP

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Little

– faculty and TA’s are available for consultation

Week 14

(April 20)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

METHODS

WORKSHOP

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Activity: Students work individually or in groups on writing the Methods

section – faculty and TA’s are available for consultation

April 27 –

Pharmacy

Day

Week 15

(May 4)

TC in Moos

1-450;

Duluth in

165 Lsci

DISCUSSING

SYSTEMATIC LIT

REVIEW RESULTS

Faculty:

TC: Pakhomov

Duluth: Rumbley

Faculty Presentation: on the difference between summarizing and

synthesizing. Tips for writing the Discussion and Conclusion sections.

Activity: Students work in groups to polish their final deliverables.

Assessment 10 (due last day of exam week - May 11): Submit the final

version of the Project proposal and Methods deliverables by last day of exam

week. No topic or advisor changes will be permitted after this point!

Summer

Break

EPA 2

PD3 Fall

Semester

FINAL PAPER and

PRESENTATION

Submit final paper and presentation (exact due date is TBD)

CONFERENCE DAY Students prepare for their presentations and present their work.

11

ASSESSMENT & GRADING

The following graded assessments will count toward your final grade for this course in the following amounts:

# Assigned Due Title

Brief description

Points % of

final

grade

1 Week 1 In class Assessment 1: Online quiz on course expectations and

requirements

1 1%

2 Week 2 In class Assessment 2: Online quiz on purpose and elements of

systematic literature reviews

4 4%

3 Week 3 In class Assessment 3: Online quiz on characteristics of good and

bad research questions

5 5%

4 Week 4 Week 5

by start of

class

Assessment 4: Online quiz on literature searching 5 5%

5 Week 5 In class Assessment 5: Online quiz on bibliography and citation

managers

5 5%

6 Week 8 Week 9

by start of

class

Assessment 6: Online quiz on research study designs and

levels of scientific evidence

5 5%

7 Week 9 Week 12

by start of

class

Assessment 7: Students submit a 1-1.5 page Proposal

for the project they plan to pursue for the rest of the course.

25 25%

8 Week 10 Week 11

by start of

class

Assessment 8: Students provide peer-feedback on 3

proposals by other students

15 15%

9 Week 12 Week 14

by start of

class

Assessment 9: Submit a draft of the Methods section of

the paper for peer and faculty feedback.

10 10%

10 Open Last day

of exam

week

Assessment 10: Submit the final Proposal and the

Methods section of the paper for faculty evaluation and

feedback.

25 25%

Total* 100 100%

Statement on Penalties for Late Work

University Make-up Assignment Policy

12

As a rule, we will not accept late assignments for full credit! However, late assignments may be excused under the

following conditions: illness (verified by note from a physician); a family emergency (verified by note from a

professional in attendance); a University sponsored event (verified by a University official or a note from the leader

of the sponsoring organization); and military duties (verified by a note from a commander).

In this course, assignments posted after the published deadline but before the next class period will be assessed a

5-point penalty. Assignments posted after the start of class but within 72 hours will be assessed a 10-point penalty.

The penalty points shall not exceed the points designated for that assignment. For example, if an assignment is

worth 5 points but the submission is posted after the start of class and within the 72 hours window, the assignment

will receive 0 points (rather than negative points).

Assignments posted after 72 hours of the published deadline will receive zero points for the

assignment, but MUST still be completed as a requirement of the course. Failure to complete the

assignment will result in a “fail” grade for the course.

13

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Feedback from course directors and faculty are not meant to make you feel inadequate; they are meant to help you learn by identifying areas for you to concentrate on moving forward. Whenever possible, take this information in the spirit that it is offered: Constructive feedback that will provide milestone progress checks in your learning.

Other ways you can monitor your learning: ● Revisit the course objectives, and reflect honestly about what you are learning and where you

might need help. Take steps to get that help. ● Talk with your peers and compare your learning with theirs. Use your area of strength to help

others; and ask others to help you. Much learning happens via conversation-- either formal or informal.

● Check in with your course instructional team (instructors, teaching assistants, course coordinators) about areas of concern.

Grading

S/N (pass/fail) For EPA 1, students will receive a passing grade (S) if they earn at least 70 out of 100 possible points listed in the Assignments and Grading section of this syllabus. Earning less than 70 points will result in a failing grade for EPA 1.

Note: Students must complete all course assignments in order to pass the course. No partial grades are possible and will not be issued for incomplete assignments.

Note: Points earned in EPA 1 do NOT transfer and are independent of the grade earned in EPA 2. Thus, it may be possible (but not likely or advisable!) to earn a failing grade in EPA 1 and a passing grade in EPA 2.

Attendance Policy

Students are expected to attend every class for which they are registered. Students are expected to attend classes on the campus where they are enrolled. Full attendance is expected for the face-to-face class sessions. However, reasonable issues such as illness, natural disasters, or acts of Nature are sufficient to warrant an absence. Students who miss a class period (whether an excused absence or not) will be required to demonstrate to the course directors that the student meets the learning objectives for the missed class session. Students are responsible for arranging such demonstrations of competency with the course director on their respective campus.

Honor Code

Academic misconduct is any unauthorized act which may give a student an unfair advantage over other students, including but not limited to: falsification, plagiarism, misuse of test materials, receiving unauthorized assistance and giving unauthorized assistance. Instructors or a fellow student may report academic misconduct during an exam to the Course Directors and the Honor Council for investigation.

University of Minnesota and College of Pharmacy Policy Reference (Central Syllabus) This page

14

includes all required UMN and CoP policies, e.g., Academic Freedom; Copyright; Course Evaluations; Disability Accommodations; FERPA, etc.

Technology Requirements and Help

The University of Minnesota computer requirements are listed here:

● http://www1.umn.edu/moodle/start/technical.html ● Students are required to bring laptop computers or electronic tablets to class each day to conduct

Internet searches of course-related topics as required during class. ● Each day, students are required to bring a device to class that is capable of interacting with the

classroom’s audience response system. ● Technology Help, Duluth: 218-726-8847 itsshelp@d.umn.edu ● Technology Help, Twin Cities: 612-301-4357 help@umn.edu

Course Materials

● Required course readings are provided on Moodle. ● Additional optional resources will be listed and linked where possible

15

16

APPENDIX

17

Final Paper Required Content and Format

Section Details

Format

Specifications

● 2500 words for the body of the paper (Introduction, Methods, Results,

Discussion/Conclusion) Figures and tables do not count towards 2500

word count. The word limit may be adjusted as needed if additional

primary data will be used.

● Use either 12 point Times New Roman or 11 point Arial fonts (not

both), double spaced, 1” margins

● National Library of Medicine MEDLINE format for references and in-text

citations. Quick guide for most frequently cited types of literature:

https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html

● Superscripts and subscripts used appropriately and pages numbered

consecutively

● Abbreviations appropriately defined

● No spelling or punctuation errors

● Do not adorn the paper (including the title page with graphics other than

Figures and Tables pertinent to the content of the paper)

● TIP: Refer to Citing Medicine, 2nd Edition as a more in-depth guide for

citing literature http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine

● TIP: Use the American Medical Association Manual of Style for

suggestions on acceptable writing practices including grammar,

punctuation, formatting, etc. - http://www.amamanualofstyle.com/

Title Page Title, author, course number, date of submission, advisor name if applicable,

and copyright permission, if applicable.

Table of Contents

& Table of Figures

& Tables

● Do not include a table of contents.

● Do not include a list of figures and tables. Insert figures and tables into

the text of the paper, preferably close to where the first reference to the

table or figure is made in the text.

Abstract ● 250 words maximum

● Unstructured (No headings such as “Objective”, “Methods”, ”Results”,

etc.)

● Includes a brief statement of the rationale/objective(s) of the paper, the

methods used, and a summary of results and conclusions in free

narrative form.

● There should be no references in the abstract.

Keywords List up to 5 keywords or phrases that one may use to find your paper if it were to be published online. Use semicolon to separate keywords/phrases.

Introduction ● Includes most relevant and brief background information with appropriate citations to prior work.

● Statement of the problem or gap in knowledge being investigated,

18

including its significance to pharmacy

● Clear statement of the Research Question, preferably in PICO format; however, other formats may be more appropriate for specific questions that don’t lend themselves to PICO format.

● Statement of the purpose/objective of the study ● Any terms that the author expects to be unfamiliar to their audience

should be defined in the Introduction. ● TIP: Some authors like to write the Introduction last. This way they know

what information they need to include in the Introduction for the readers to understand the rest of the paper more easily

● TIP: As you work on your Proposal for EPA 1, think in terms of converting the Proposal to the Introduction in EPA 2. Many of the criteria for the Proposal and Introduction are the same.

Methods ● Brief description and justification of the literature sources

● List of search terms and their Boolean (e.g., AND, OR) combinations

● Description and justification for selection criteria used to arrive at the final

set of articles for review

● Description of how information was extracted from articles

● Description of of the data elements extracted from the articles that will be

used in the final paper as column headings in the Table summarizing the

project results.

● Description of criteria used to evaluate the quality of evidence in each

article (e.g. CEBM criteria)

● Primary data (if used) - detailed methods used to collect and analyze

data, IRB approval, participants, sample size, etc. These elements vary

greatly by individual study and should be determined in consultation with

the faculty advisor.

Results

● Proper presentation of the findings/data in a clear, logical and organized manner

● "Study Selection Flow Diagram" (Figure 1) to show the process and result of the selected articles

● Results table (Table 1) listing all reviewed articles with their key data elements and major findings selected for abstraction (as described in the Methods)

● Assessment of the quality of evidence presented in the reviewed articles the criteria stated in the Methods.

Guidelines for

including

Figures/Tables:

● Only one figure/table per page

● Tables and figures are sufficiently large to see key elements

● All values have appropriate units,

● Figures/tables are computer-generated if possible (i.e. not hand-drawn),

● Legend for each figure or table appears on the same page as the figure

or table and is informative of the content of the figure/table.

Discussion

● Concise summary of data/results,

● The focus should be on synthesis of significant findings as they relate to

answering the study questions and objectives stated in the Introduction

● Thoughtful discussion of the strengths and limitations of the

19

research/studies reviewed should be present

● A conclusion that is research-based and data-driven (i.e. the conclusion

should not over- or under-reach the evidence presented in the Results

section) should be present

● Discuss implications for pharmacy practice (if any) and generalizability of

the findings across healthcare.

● Discuss what opportunities for further research this project has

uncovered

Acknowledgments ● Optional

● Here you can acknowledge anyone that has made a contribution to your

efforts – consultants, faculty, preceptors, College staff, etc.

● Any funding sources should be listed here too (this will not be applicable

for most projects in EPA).

References ● At least 5 references to articles being reviewed (those included in the

results table (Table 1)

● At least 10 references total (including the 5 articles in Table 1)

20

MEMO to COP Faculty: Using Results of Primary Research

Memo to Faculty

regarding primary

research data

This is an information copy for students of the memo sent to College faculty about the EPA1 primary research option. Dear Faculty:

As you may recall, the EPA1 course (formerly Colloquium) included a primary

research option for students. In keeping with that option, students who have an

established research relationship with a faculty member may ask faculty to be

their adviser for the paper they are required to write for this course (spring

2017). Faculty are under no obligation to take on students as advisees.

Please note that all students are required to satisfy all course requirements and

produce high quality work in answering a pharmacy related research question

using a systematic literature review. The students who wish to use primary

data for their EPA paper may do so but ONLY in ADDITION to conducting the

literature review. Primary data may ONLY be used to support/strengthen (or

refute) findings obtained from the systematic review of literature – primary data

analysis may NOT be used as a substitute for systematic literature review for

the purposes of satisfying EPA requirements.

Also, please note that if you agree to advise a student who wishes to collect and

use primary data originating from human subjects or animals, it will be your

responsibility to ensure that the student complies with all regulatory

requirements at the University of Minnesota and obtains (and maintains)

appropriate IRB approval(s).

Please review the following options so that you can respond to students

accordingly:

If … Then ...

A faculty member agrees to act as a student's adviser for the purposes of completing EPA1

● The faculty member will assess, supervise revision as needed, and submit grades for student mentees at established course milestones for this and the second course in the sequence (EPA2).

● The faculty member and student will sign a course contract establishing this relationship at the beginning of the spring semester.

● Students will still attend course classes and abide by course requirements described in the syllabus. (This does not represent any increased burden on the student; it just ensures that they are meeting the same requirements as their peers - only under the guidance of an adviser versus a course reviewer).

A faculty member is unable to accommodate a student’s request for the primary research option

● The faculty member will decline and communicate this directly to the student.

● The student will complete regular course requirements. No primary research will be permitted without a faculty adviser.

21

22

EPA1 Using Primary Research Data - Learning Contract

We, ________________________________and _____________________________________

faculty adviser name and student name,

have an established relationship for conducting primary research. We agree to participate in the primary

research option for EPA1 and EPA2 in accordance with the requirements of the course syllabus. We

understand and agree with the following:

a) Faculty advisers will supervise the student’s successful completion of - and submit grades for -

EPA1 course milestones. Please note that all students, including those who participate in this

primary research option, are required to meet course requirements and produce work of high

quality in answering a pharmacy related research question using a systematic literature review.

The students who wish to use primary data for their EPA paper may do so but ONLY in

ADDITION to conducting the literature review. Primary data may ONLY be used to

support/strengthen (or refute) findings obtained from the systematic review of literature – primary

data analysis may NOT be used as a substitute for systematic literature review for the purposes

of satisfying EPA requirements.

b) Faculty advisors ARE RESPONSIBLE for being aware of the EPA course milestones and

ensuring that the student they advise meets all of the course requirements stated in the syllabus.

c) The faculty adviser will mentor the student (supervise successful completion of - and submit

grades for) both semesters of this course sequence (EPA1 & EPA2).

d) The faculty adviser is responsible for ensuring that the student’s work complies with the IRB, if applicable, and, ensures any necessary training and certifications are completed and maintained.

e) Students are committed to the agreed upon research project for both semesters of the course

sequence.

f) Students will complete all of the course requirements as described in the syllabus which includes class attendance, quizzes, brief reflections, etc. In addition, students will complete any necessary training as instructed by their faculty adviser.