Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of the factor analysis of evaluation items (by 6-point scale) of the students’ pharmacy practice

From: Evaluation of pharmacy practice program in the 6-year pharmaceutical education curriculum in Japan: hospital pharmacy practice program

Question

FA1

FA2

FA3

FA4

(1) I am satisfied because I was able to learn what would be useful for my career as a pharmacist.

0.84

0.02

−0.05

−0.05

(2) I was able to experience the overall work of a pharmacist sufficiently.

0.84

−0.09

−0.05

0.01

(3) The actual learning contents were in line with the learning objectives (SBOs).

0.72

−0.08

0.03

−0.01

(4) I felt that I had too many tasks that would not lead to learning for me as a trainee.

−0.65

−0.01

0.05

−0.01

(5) I was able to experience “team medical care” at hospital sufficiently.

0.63

0.02

−0.03

0.06

(6) Some learning contents were far from pharmacist’s work.

−0.52

0.03

0.05

0.03

(7) Training schedule by hour was prepared and informed to me in advance.

0.49

−0.05

0.03

−0.06

(8) At the beginning of the training, an appropriate orientation useful for the training was conducted (e.g., briefing on the overall work of hospital and pharmacy).

0.46

−0.10

0.19

0.02

(9) I felt a gap between the ideal and real work of a pharmacist.

−0.43

−0.01

0.13

0.02

(10) I think I can work in clinical practice without problem because I was able to obtain a better understanding of the role of medicine or a pharmacist to some extent.

0.36

0.12

0.00

0.04

(11) The pharmacists facilitated your appropriate self-learning so that you can solve the problems of the patients.

0.35

0.34

0.04

0.05

(12) The pharmacists were able to have an empathetic communication with you.

−0.09

0.95

0.02

0.00

(13) The pharmacists accepted you as a member of the team.

0.05

0.72

0.08

−0.03

(14) I experienced some problems getting along with people at the training site.

−0.14

−0.46

0.11

0.04

(15) The university teachers gave you enough feedback on your learnings at the training site.

−0.15

0.07

0.91

0.00

(16) The university teachers provided enough support for me so that I can prevent trouble or work on the practical training smoothly in case of trouble.

0.01

−0.02

0.85

−0.02

(17) The practical training contents were well matched with the classes from the 1st to the 4th years (excluding the pre-practice training).

0.24

−0.03

0.36

−0.03

(18) I was able to have enough time with patients to talk with them.

−0.02

−0.01

−0.02

1.02

(19) I was able to have enough time with patients to explain about drugs or the disease.

0.07

0.02

0.03

0.75

Inter-factor correlations

    

FA1

 

0.67

0.40

0.53

FA2

  

0.30

0.49

FA3

   

0.28

Cronbach’s alpha

0.76

0.75

0.72

0.69

  1. The factors were defined as following: the 1st factor (FA1) is “satisfactory learning (hospital);” the 2nd factor (FA2) is the “support system of the training site (hospital);” the 3rd factor (FA3) is the “support system of the university;” and the 4th factor (FA4) is “dialogue with patients.” The bold numbers are the factors loadings that were considered significant