Defining and unpacking the core concepts of pharmacology: A global initiative.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Development of core concepts in disciplines such as biochemistry, microbiology and physiology have transformed teaching. They provide the foundation for the development of teaching resources for global educators, as well as valid and reliable approaches to assessment. An international research consensus recently identified 25 core concepts of pharmacology. The current study aimed to define and unpack these concepts. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: A two-phase, iterative approach, involving 60 international pharmacology education experts, was used. The first phase involved drafting definitions for core concepts and identifying key sub-concepts via a series of online meetings and asynchronous work. These were refined in the second phase, through a 2-day hybrid workshop followed by a further series of online meetings and asynchronous work. KEY RESULTS: The project produced consensus definitions for a final list of 24 core concepts and 103 sub-concepts of pharmacology. The iterative, discursive methodology resulted in modification of concepts from the original study, including change of 'drug-receptor interaction' to 'drug-target interaction' and the change of the core concept 'agonists and antagonists' to sub-concepts of drug-target interaction. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Definitions and sub-concepts of 24 core concepts provide an evidence-based foundation for pharmacology curricula development and evaluation. The next steps for this project include the development of a concept inventory to assess acquisition of concepts, as well as the development of case studies and educational resources to support teaching by the global pharmacology community, and student learning of the most critical and fundamental concepts of the discipline.

Developing an international concept-based curriculum for pharmacology education: The promise of core concepts and concept inventories.

Over recent years, studies have shown that science and health profession graduates demonstrate gaps in their fundamental pharmacology knowledge and ability to apply pharmacology concepts in practice. This article reviews the current challenges faced by pharmacology educators, including the exponential growth in discipline knowledge and competition for curricular time. We then argue that pharmacology education should focus on essential concepts that enable students to develop beyond 'know' towards 'know how to'. A concept-based approach will help educators prioritize and benchmark their pharmacology curriculum, facilitate integration of pharmacology with other disciplines in the curriculum, create alignment between universities and improve application of pharmacology knowledge to professional contexts such as safe prescribing practices. To achieve this, core concepts first need to be identified and unpacked, and methods for teaching and assessment using concept inventories developed. The International Society for Basic and Clinical Pharmacology Education Section (IUPHAR-Ed) Core Concepts of Pharmacology (CCP) initiative involves over 300 educators from the global pharmacology community. CCP has identified and defined the core concepts of pharmacology, together with key underpinning sub-concepts. To realize these benefits, pharmacology educators must develop methods to teach and assess core concepts. Work to develop concept inventories is ongoing, including identifying student misconceptions of the core concepts and creating a bank of multiple-choice questions to assess student understanding. Future work aims to develop and validate materials and methods to help educators embed core concepts within curricula. Potential strategies that educators can use to overcome factors that inhibit adoption of core concepts are presented.

Identifying the core concepts of pharmacology education: A global initiative.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In recent decades, a focus on the most critical and fundamental concepts has proven highly advantageous to students and educators in many science disciplines. Pharmacology, unlike microbiology, biochemistry, or physiology, lacks a consensus list of such core concepts. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: We sought to develop a research-based, globally relevant list of core concepts that all students completing a foundational pharmacology course should master. This two-part project consisted of exploratory and refinement phases. The exploratory phase involved empirical data mining of the introductory sections of five key textbooks, in parallel with an online survey of over 200 pharmacology educators from 17 countries across six continents. The refinement phase involved three Delphi rounds involving 24 experts from 15 countries across six continents. KEY RESULTS: The exploratory phase resulted in a consolidated list of 74 candidate core concepts. In the refinement phase, the expert group produced a consensus list of 25 core concepts of pharmacology. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: This list will allow pharmacology educators everywhere to focus their efforts on the conceptual knowledge perceived to matter most by experts within the discipline. Next steps for this project include defining and unpacking each core concept and developing resources to help pharmacology educators globally teach and assess these concepts within their educational contexts.

Defining and unpacking the core concepts of pharmacology education.

Pharmacology education currently lacks a research-based consensus on which core concepts all graduates should know and understand, as well as a valid and reliable means to assess core conceptual learning. The Core Concepts in Pharmacology Expert Group (CC-PEG) from Australia and New Zealand recently identified a set of core concepts of pharmacology education as a first step toward developing a concept inventory-a valid and reliable tool to assess learner attainment of concepts. In the current study, CC-PEG used established methodologies to define each concept and then unpack its key components. Expert working groups of three to seven educators were formed to unpack concepts within specific conceptual groupings: what the body does to the drug (pharmacokinetics); what the drug does to the body (pharmacodynamics); and system integration and modification of drug-response. First, a one-sentence definition was developed for each core concept. Next, sub-concepts were established for each core concept. These twenty core concepts, along with their respective definitions and sub-concepts, can provide pharmacology educators with a resource to guide the development of new curricula and the evaluation of existing curricula. The unpacking and articulation of these core concepts will also inform the development of a pharmacology concept inventory. We anticipate that these resources will advance further collaboration across the international pharmacology education community to improve curricula, teaching, assessment, and learning.

Identifying the core concepts of pharmacology education.

Pharmacology education currently lacks an agreed knowledge curriculum. Evidence from physics and biology education indicates that core concepts are useful and effective structures around which such a curriculum can be designed to facilitate student learning. Building on previous work, we developed a novel, criterion-based method to identify the core concepts of pharmacology education. Five novel criteria were developed, based on a literature search, to separate core concepts in pharmacology from topics and facts. Core concepts were agreed to be big ideas, enduring, difficult, applicable across contexts, and useful to solve problems. An exploratory survey of 33 pharmacology educators from Australia and New Zealand produced 109 terms, which were reduced to a working list of 26 concepts during an online workshop. Next, an expert group of 12 educators refined the working list to 19 concepts, by applying the five criteria and consolidating synonyms, and added three additional concepts that emerged during discussions. A confirmatory survey of a larger group resulted in 17 core concepts of pharmacology education. This list may be useful for educators to evaluate existing curricula, design new curricula, and to inform the development of a concept inventory to test attainment of the core concepts in pharmacology.

Synthesis of the Mechanisms of Opioid Tolerance: Do We Still Say NO?

The use of morphine as a first-line agent for moderate-to-severe pain is limited by the development of analgesic tolerance. Initially opioid receptor desensitization in response to repeated stimulation, thought to underpin the establishment of tolerance, was linked to a compensatory increase in adenylate cyclase responsiveness. The subsequent demonstration of cross-talk between N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) glutamate receptors and opioid receptors led to the recognition of a role for nitric oxide (NO), wherein blockade of NO synthesis could prevent tolerance developing. Investigations of the link between NO levels and opioid receptor desensitization implicated a number of events including kinase recruitment and peroxynitrite-mediated protein regulation. Recent experimental advances and the identification of new cellular constituents have expanded the potential signaling candidates to include unexpected, intermediary compounds not previously linked to this process such as zinc, histidine triad nucleotide-binding protein 1 (HINT1), micro-ribonucleic acid (mi-RNA) and regulator of G protein signaling Z (RGSZ). A further complication is a lack of consistency in the protocols used to create tolerance, with some using acute methods measured in minutes to hours and others using days. There is also an emphasis on the cellular changes that are extant only after tolerance has been established. Although a review of the literature demonstrates a lack of spatio-temporal detail, there still appears to be a pivotal role for nitric oxide, as well as both intracellular and intercellular cross-talk. The use of more consistent approaches to verify these underlying mechanism(s) could provide an avenue for targeted drug development to rescue opioid efficacy.

An evaluation of pharmacology curricula in Australian science and health-related degree programs.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacology is a biomedical discipline taught in basic science and professional degree programs. In order to provide information that would facilitate pharmacology curricula to be refined and developed, and approaches to teaching to be updated, a national survey was undertaken in Australia that investigated pharmacology course content, teaching and summative assessment methods. METHODS: Twenty-two institutions participated in a purpose-built online questionnaire, which enabled an evaluation of 147 courses taught in 10 different degrees. To enable comparison, degrees were grouped into four major degree programs, namely science, pharmacy, medicine and nursing. The pharmacology content was then classified into 16 lecture themes, with 2-21 lecture topics identified per theme. The resultant data were analysed for similarities and differences in pharmacology curricula across the degree programs. RESULTS: While all lecture themes were taught across degree programs, curriculum content differed with respect to the breadth and hours of coverage. Overall, lecture themes were taught most broadly in medicine and with greatest coverage in pharmacy. Reflecting a more traditional approach, lectures were a dominant teaching method (at least 90% of courses). Sixty-three percent of science courses provided practical classes but such sessions occurred much less frequently in other degree programs, while tutorials were much more common in pharmacy degree programs (70%). Notably, problem-based learning was common across medical programs. Considerable diversity was found in the types of summative assessment tasks employed. In science courses the most common form of in-semester assessment was practical reports, whereas in other programs pen-and-paper quizzes predominated. End-of-semester assessment contributed 50-80% to overall assessment across degree programs. CONCLUSION: The similarity in lecture themes taught across the four different degree programs shows that common knowledge- and competency-based learning outcomes can be defined for pharmacology. The authors contend that it is the differences in breadth and coverage of material for each lecture theme, and the differing teaching modes and assessment that characterise particular degree programs. Adoption of pharmacology knowledge-based learning outcomes that could be tailored to suit individual degree programs would better facilitate the sharing of expertise and teaching practice than the current model where pharmacology curricula are degree-specific.