Cited by 21Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutStudent Stress and CopingDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions

A longitudinal analysis of first professional year pharmacy student well-being

Open access
Hagemeier, Nicholas E., Carlson, Tucker S., Roberts, Chelsea L., Thomas, Morgan·2020·American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Abstract

Objective. To assess and characterize Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) students’ well-being across the first professional year (P1) and determine the relationship between the number of examinations taken, student grade point average, and well-being scores. Methods. All P1 students (N=76) enrolled at one college of pharmacy self-reported their career, community, financial, physical, social, and overall well-being on a weekly basis during the fall and spring semesters. Parametric statistical tests were used to examine the extent to which students’ well-being scores varied throughout the academic year, the extent to which their domain-specific well-being scores predicted overall well-being scores, and the association between their well-being scores and the number of examinations they had taken in a week and their grade point average. Results. Overall and domain-specific well-being scores significantly decreased from the beginning to the end of fall semester. Students’ overall well-being across the academic year was most frequently predicted by their career well-being, physical well-being, and social well-being scores. Career, community, physical, and overall well-being scores were significantly negatively associated with the number of examinations the students completed during the week. Students’ self-reported overall well-being during the fall semester was positively associated with their fall semester GPA. Conclusion. Significant variation was found in students’ domain-specific and overall well-being across the P1 year. These findings can guide both the development and timing of school interventions to promote student well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5688/ajpe7735

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hagemeier, N. E., Carlson, T. S., Roberts, C. L., & Thomas, M.
Affiliations
East Tennessee State University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
84
Issue
7
Pages
ajpe7735
ISSN
0002-9459 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3007086012
Cited by
20
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - East Tennessee State University (East Tennessee State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Keywords
student well-being, pharmacy students, career well-being, community well-being, physical well-being, social well-being, academic workload, grade point average, well-being interventions
MeSH terms
Curriculum, Education, Pharmacy, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Pharmacy, Schools, Pharmacy, Students, Pharmacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review