| • Certificates
• Publications
• The profession
• Supervision (2)
• Community pharmacy (2)
• Pack sizes
• Clinical trials
• Clostridium difficile
• The Journal
• Postgraduate education
• Retention fees
Letters to the Editor
|
Publications
Disappointment over claimed “inaccuracies”
From Ms C. De Bono and Ms N. Bukhari, MRPharmS
We thank Amanda
Kemp and Helen Middleton for bringing to our attention
their views on “inaccuracies” present in our publication ‘The
pre-registration interview’ by Nadia Bukhari (PJ, 20 October,
p440).
However we are disappointed since the claimed inaccuracies are,
in reality, differences of opinion and about the clarification of specific
information
that would have been inappropriate and unhelpful in the context of a
book intended to last several years.
Our intention in publishing this book was to provide readers with guidance
and accessible information to prepare them for the preregistration trainee
application and interview process in all pharmacy sectors (hospital,
community and industry).
However, inevitably a print publication becomes dated at the time of
writing. The information published in the book was, to the best of the
author’s knowledge, the latest information available. The author
spent some time researching the relevant information and spoke to Pharmalife
several times about the hospital application process.
In addition to
this, all Pharmaceutical Press publications undergo a rigorous review
process and every effort is made to check the accuracy of content. In
this instance, the manuscript was peer reviewed by a regional preregistration
trainee facilitator at a UK school of pharmacy, a Boots teacher practitioner
at a UK school of pharmacy and a preregistration trainee training facilitator
at a UK hospital.
To address the specific issues raised, we are sure readers of the PJ appreciate
Ms Kemp and Ms Middleton’s clarification of the deadline
date this year for the submission of applications for the second round
of hospital interviews. However, it would have been misleading to include
a specific date in the book when the date changes annually.
We also appreciate the clarification of the relationship between the
NHS Pharmacy Education and Development Committee and Pharmalife although
this would be of little interest to a student as part of the application
process itself. And, finally, the point made regarding ranking of trusts
is a matter of opinion and the author obviously differs in opinion on
this point.
Pharmaceutical Press welcomes constructive criticism for all publications
and we thank Ms Kemp and Ms Middleton for taking the time to review this
publication. We have previously had only positive responses from readers
who have found the book most helpful in their application and interview
process. Christina De Bono
Senior Commissioning Editor
Pharmaceutical Press
London
Nadia Bukhari
Masters of Pharmacy Programme Manager and Preregistration
Co-ordinator
School of Pharmacy, University of London
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal