Premium
Pharm.D.‐Only Investigators Are Critical to the Profession: Let's Preserve the Fellowship as an Equally Important Way to Prepare Future Clinical Pharmaceutical Scientists: Or the Case Against the “All‐Ph.D.”
Author(s) -
Bauman Jerry L.,
Evans William E.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
pharmacotherapy: the journal of human pharmacology and drug therapy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.227
H-Index - 109
eISSN - 1875-9114
pISSN - 0277-0008
DOI - 10.1592/phco.29.2.129
Subject(s) - memphis , library science , pharmacy , medicine , family medicine , computer science , biology , botany
Let us begin with truth in advertising: neither of us has completed a research fellowship or a Ph.D. So, despite (or because of) our “career-development shortcomings,” we felt compelled to comment on the current state of affairs and the direction that leaders in clinical pharmacy have chosen in recommending the preferred method of preparing the clinical pharmaceutical scientists of the future. There appears to be a sheep-like momentum here, as two national groups of Pharm.D.s (no less) have warmly embraced the Ph.D. route as the preferred method: first, an American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) task force,1 and now, somewhat surprisingly, the American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP).2 Having served as presidents of ACCP in our younger days, we would not have predicted this turn of events when ACCP was founded. We will attempt to convince at least some of the readers of Pharmacotherapy to resist these recommendations and preserve the Pharm.D./fellowship route — on at least equal footing with the Pharm.D./Ph.D. route. If we can convince at least some of the more accomplished Pharm.D. investigators to oppose the Pharm.D./Ph.D. direction, perhaps they will serve as role models for some of our smarter students to follow.