|
Collaborator Assessment
|
|
Introduces the topic
|
|
Describes the background to the topic, the rational for and clinical relevance of the study question, and a summary of existing literature *
|
Below
☐
|
Meets
☐
|
Exceeds
☒
|
Not applicable
☐
|
|
Comments: strengths and/or areas for development *
As our practice lead for diabetes, the pharmacist was able to provide all of the relevant context underpinning this paper, presenting not just the national picture but also local context, and how this would impact on our local population.
|
|
Study methodology and results
|
|
Clearly describes the aim, study population including inclusion/exclusion criteria, the intervention, outcomes, and statistical analysis (as appropriate to study design) *
|
Below
☐
|
Meets
☒
|
Exceeds
☐
|
Not applicable
☐
|
|
Comments: strengths and/or areas for development *
The pharmacist provided a clear summary of the study methodology, the population included (and excluded), and the benefits and side effects associated with the medicines.
|
|
Analysis and critique
|
|
Describes strengths/weaknesses of the paper and their own perspective on the validity of the study results / authors’ conclusions. *
|
Below
☐
|
Meets
☒
|
Exceeds
☐
|
Not applicable
☐
|
|
Comments: strengths and/or areas for development *
The pharmacist was able to critique the trial data, describing the validity of the author’s conclusions, and also identifying potential issues (e.g. real world practice vs trial conditions, the complexity of the local population compared to the trial population, etc.).
|
|
Implications for practice
|
|
Describes implications for current / future clinical practice and research. *
|
Below
☐
|
Meets
☐
|
Exceeds
☒
|
Not applicable
☐
|
|
Comments: strengths and/or areas for development *
The pharmacist really understood how this evidence and the potential introduction of this new medicine impacted on local practice. She had already updated our local diabetes protocol, and clearly articulated how this would be implemented.
|
|
Presentation
|
|
Presents in a clear and concise way, appropriately uses visual material, conveys their critical evaluation of the topic into a concise and flowing presentation. *
|
Below
☐
|
Meets
☐
|
Exceeds
☒
|
Not applicable
☐
|
|
Comments: strengths and/or areas for development *
The pharmacist demonstrated her ability to describe complex information in a way that was understandable for the mixed audience (including GPs, practice nurses, AHPs, and a range of students). She was articulate and clear, and managed questions extremely well.
She appeared confident and knowledgeable throughout.
|