Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 (8): 549-550CORRESPONDENCE 1170-7690/04/0008-0549/$31.00/0

© 2004 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.

Although the Task Force’s research was complet-Outcome Measures for ed, we continued to investigate pharmacoeconomicsand outcomes research fellowship programmes withPharmacoeconomicsthe purpose of developing outcome measures for

Education such programmes as a means of evaluating theireffectiveness. Thus, using a modified version ofBloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives as aWith pharmacoeconomics educational offeringsconceptual framework,[7] we reviewed the educa-varying greatly worldwide, Rascati and colleagues[1]

tional objectives for pharmacoeconomics and out-highlight the efforts that the International Societycomes research fellowships defined in the existingfor Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Researchguidelines[3,4] and classified them into the three(ISPOR) is making to define standards. The authorsdomains: cognitive, affective and psychomotor.[8]

reported the ISPOR’s initiative to establish a set ofPossible outcome measures were then developed forpotential learning outcomes for pharmacoeco-determining mastery of the educational objectives innomics programmes that would assist institutionseach domain[9] and subsequently used in a surveyand organisations in the design of programmes’administered to former fellows of pharmacoeco-curricula and, more importantly, would help de-nomics and outcomes research fellowships. The re-velop outcome measures to determine whether suchsults of this study suggested that pharmacoeconom-programmes are providing learners with effectiveics and outcomes research fellowship programmestraining.are appropriate educational models to meet the de-

According to these aims, in 2000 the ISPORmand for expertise in health economics.[8] More

Fellowship Task Force was formed in order toimportantly, this research provides a framework by

define the fundamentals of a core curriculum forwhich outcome measures may be developed for

postgraduate pharmacoeconomics and outcomespharmacoeconomics education.[8]

research fellowship programmes, which have emer-As members of ISPOR, we strongly support theged as the most common type of training pro-

ISPOR’s endeavour to set standards for the variousgramme in health economics in the US.[2] As apharmacoeconomics educational offerings. As such,result, in 2001 the Task Force started a researchwe would like to share our own experience over thestudy with two main objectives: (i) to describe thelast 4 years in developing a model of outcomeorganisational structure and educational compon-measures for pharmacoeconomics and outcomes re-ents of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes researchsearch fellowship programmes, which is availablefellowship programmes; and (ii) to determine theupon request.extent to which these programmes adhere to extant

Vittorio Maiopharmacoeconomics fellowships guidelines.[3,4] TheDepartment of Health Policy, Jefferson Medical

study’s findings revealed that pharmacoeconomics College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAand outcomes research fellowships have numeroussimilarities in terms of their organisational and edu- Jennifer H. Loflandcational aspects, such that a common profile for Department of Health Policy and the Departmentthese programmes can be described.[5] In addition, of Medicine, Jefferson Medical College,pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research pro- Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAgrammes showed significant compliance with themain aspects of the guidelines, which define both

Referencesthe structure and the process of fellowships.[6] How-1. Rascati KL, Drummond MF, Annemans L, et al. Education in

ever, these guidelines do not identify outcome mea- pharmacoeconomics: an international multidisciplinary view.Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 (3): 139-47sures for pharmacoeconomics and outcomes re-

2. Maio V, Girts TK, Lofland JH, et al. Pharmacoeconomicsearch fellowships;[2] therefore, the Task Force’s fellowships: the need for outcome measures. Pharmacoeco-study was unable to determine their effectiveness. nomics 2001; 19 (8): 795-802

550 Correspondence

3. Lee J, Lawrence BJ, Sullivan SD, et al. Guidelines for 6. Maio V, Lofland JH, Nash DB. Pharmacoeconomic fellowships:pharmacoeconomic research fellowship. Pharmacotheraphy preceptors’ views regarding adherence to the American Col-1999; 19: 1105-9 lege of Clinical Pharmacy guidelines. Am J Pharm Educ 2003;

67 (3): Article 754. Standards for fellowship training in pharmacoeconomics and7. Gronlund NE. How to write and use instructional objectives. 6thoutcomes research. International Society for Pharmacoeco-

ed. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice-Hall Inc., 2000nomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) position statement.Lawrenceville (NJ): ISPOR, 1998 May: 1-6 (Data on file) 8. Maio V, Lofland JH. Effectiveness of pharmacoeconomics and

outcomes research fellowship programs within the United5. Maio V, Lofland JH, Doan Q, et al. Organizational structureStates. Am J Pharm Educ. In pressand educational components of pharmacoeconomic fellowship

programs: a fellows’ perspective. Am J Pharm Educ 2003; 67 9. Gronlund NE. Measurement and evaluation in teaching. 2th ed.(4): Article 105 New York (NY): The Macmillan Company, 1971

© 2004 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 (8)