Pharmacist's Letter Journal Club

TRC School of Pharmacy Academic Programs

New for 2018-19 Academic Year

TRC has new Academic Programs and an enhanced student experience for the 2018-19 school year. To access the updated Academic offerings, all schools of pharmacy and faculty/preceptors who want to participate in Pharmacist’s Letter Journal Club for the 2018-19 academic year MUST apply and be approved by TRC. Access to the Leader Notes will only be available to those who go through the new process.

Here are the steps:

  • Visit the application form to find a list of pre-approved schools: http://info.therapeuticresearch.com/pharmacists-letter-journal-club-application
  • If your school is listed, complete the form, and you will receive further instructions by email.
  • If your school is not listed, complete the form and select “Other,” and you will be contacted regarding how to set up your school.
  • Once you have enrolled, you will be provided with NEW login credentials. With your new account, you may download monthly notes below.

Participation by Application Only

Pharmacist’s Letter Journal Club from TRC allows your Pharmacy School Program to leverage the concise, summarized findings from the latest issue of Pharmacist’s Letter to deliver a structured Journal Club experience for teaching literature evaluation.

Here’s how it works:

  • Every month, TRC provides in-depth analysis of a new study, including structured worksheets for Participants and Leaders on a select topic.
  • TRC covers a broad range of topics and study types, to expose students to a comprehensive literature evaluation curriculum.
  • TRC will email program members each month when the new Journal Club topic is ready.

To participate in Pharmacist’s Letter Journal Club, your school of pharmacy program must first be approved by TRC (apply here), and there must be at least one faculty account assigned as a program leader.


October 2018

Does short-term treatment with escitalopram in patients with depression post-MI impact CV events long-term?

Discusses the long-term follow-up to a 24-week randomized controlled trial, generalizability of study results, and impact of study doses and study population on outcomes.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

September 2018

Is febuxostat linked to more CV events than allopurinol in gout patients with CV disease?

Discusses randomized active-controlled trials, non-inferiority studies, stratification, impact of study drug discontinuation on power analysis, and risk of type II error.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

August 2018

How effective is erenumab for migraine prophylaxis?

Discusses randomized placebo controlled trials, use of ordinal versus linear data, statistical versus clinical significance, normal distribution, effect size, and potential bias due to the financial interest of the study sponsor.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

July 2018

How does low-dose aspirin impact the CV and GI effects of NSAIDs?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, post hoc analysis, generalizability of study results, type 1 error, imputation of missing data, propensity scores, and bias due to the financial interest of the study sponsor.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

June 2018

Does glucose self-monitoring improve A1C or quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes who aren’t treated with insulin?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, pragmatic study design, generalizability of study results, statistical versus clinical significance, type 1 and type 2 error, study power, subgroup analysis, multiple comparisons, surrogate endpoints, and bias due to the financial interest of the study sponsor.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

May 2018

Should aspirin be used to prevent VTE after hip or knee replacement?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, noninferiority study, generalizability of study results, randomization procedures, stratification, minimal clinically important difference, type 2 error, subgroup analysis, bias due to the financial interest of the study sponsor.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

April 2018

Should new guidelines for management of Clostridium difficile change practice?

Discusses criteria for developing or evaluating practice guidelines, grading strength of evidence, author bias and conflicts of interest, guideline panel representation, feasibility of interventions in day-to-day practice, and prospective guideline validation.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

March 2018

Is giving a third dose of MMR during a mumps outbreak associated with fewer cases of mumps?

Discusses retrospective cohort study design, observational study, association versus causation, effectiveness versus efficacy, generalizability, inclusion and exclusion criteria, selection and misclassification bias, and unmeasured confounding.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

February 2018

Does hormonal contraception increase the risk of breast cancer?

Discusses prospective cohort study design, observational study, association versus causation, relative risk versus absolute risk, generalizability, unmeasured confounding, ascertainment bias and misclassification bias.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

January 2018

Does a blood pressure goal that’s lower than “standard” improve outcomes?

Discusses meta-analyses, study power, 95% confidence intervals, subgroup analysis, PRISMA method for evaluation of meta-analyses, study heterogeneity, I2 statistic, Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, random effects versus fixed effects analysis, and publication bias.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

December 2017

What is the impact of tiotropium for patients with early-stage COPD?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, prospective study, generalizability of study results, baseline characteristics, surrogate versus clinical endpoint, multiple comparisons, type 1 and type 2 error, likelihood-based method for missing data, subgroup analysis, number needed to treat.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

November 2017

Is low-dose rivaroxaban alone or with aspirin more effective than low-dose aspirin alone?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, superiority study, internal and external study validity, run-in phase, stratification, confounding, composite outcome, study power, event-driven study, intention-to-treat analysis, multiple comparisons, type 1 error, absolute risk reduction, number needed to treat, number needed to harm, statistical versus clinical significance.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

October 2017

Is treatment of hepatitis C safe and effective in the primary care setting?

Discusses non-randomized design, open-label study, confounding due to baseline differences, generalizability of results, referral bias, 95% confidence intervals, surrogate endpoints, and bias due to the funding source.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

September 2017

Is pioglitazone effective in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease?

Discusses meta-analysis, surrogate endpoints, PRISMA method for evaluation of meta-analyses, study heterogeneity, I2 statistic, random effects versus fixed effects analysis, meta-regression, internal study validity, type 2 error, and publication bias.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

August 2017

Does canagliflozin (Invokana) improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, noninferiority study, stratification, composite endpoint, number needed to treat, number needed to harm, type 1 and type 2 error, study power, sequential analysis, multiple comparisons, generalizability.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

July 2017

Do short courses of oral corticosteroids increase the risk of fracture, venous thromboembolism, or hospitalization for sepsis?

Discusses retrospective cohort studies, self controlled case series, association versus causation, internal study validity, misclassification bias, measures to assess comorbidities, confounding, sensitivity analysis, and generalizability.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

June 2017

Does dextromethorphan/quinidine improve agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, sequential parallel comparison study design, rater bias, minimal clinically important difference, clinical versus statistical significance, multiple comparisons, type 1 error, generalizability, and bias due to the funding source.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

May 2017

Does evolocumab improve outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease?

Discusses randomized controlled trial design, event-driven study, stratification, composite outcome, premature study discontinuation, generalization of study results, subgroup analysis, and bias due to the funding source.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

April 2017

Does spironolactone improve outcomes in heart failure patients with a preserved ejection fraction?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, post hoc analysis, type 1 error, impact of regional variation in study procedures, clinical versus statistical significance, and bias due to the funding source.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

March 2017

Is dexamethasone noninferior to prednisone for treating asthma exacerbations in adults?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, noninferiority margin, study validity, patients lost to follow up, sensitivity analysis, type 2 error, study power, recall and rater bias, intention-to-treat versus per protocol analysis, and generalizability.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

February 2017

Does using simvastatin or lovastatin with dabigatran increase the risk of stroke or major hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation?

Discusses nested case-control study, association versus causation, matching, misclassification bias, internal study validity, type 2 error, study power, Charlson Comorbidity Index, adherence, and generalizability.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes

January 2017

Is the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib noninferior to ibuprofen or naproxen?

Discusses randomized controlled trials, noninferiority margin, generalizability, study validity, composite endpoints, power, type 1 and type 2 error, multiple comparisons, intention-to-treat versus on-treatment population, subgroup analysis, and statistical versus clinical significance.

Leader Notes

Participant Notes