International Benchmarking of Pharmacology Curricula and Prescribing Related Learning Outcomes, Implications for Australian Health Professional Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

<h4>Background</h4>Pharmacology plays a central role in linking biomedical science concepts with their application in clinical practice across medical and healthcare education. Globally, the pharmacological curriculum has evolved, just like other disciplines, through the integration of case-based, problem-based, and hybrid teaching models that led to firm clinical reasoning and long-term learning. Thus, this study aims to evaluate and compare the learning outcomes of pharmacology curricula across the globe by adopting a systematic review and meta-analysis research approach.<h4>Methods</h4>This comprehensive review was conducted with transparency and integrity in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251207753). Five electronic databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to October 2025. The Cochrane Library tool was used for the risk of bias assessment of randomised controlled trials, while the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist was used for mixed-design, quasi-experimental, and cross-sectional cohorts. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analysis.<h4>Results</h4>Out of 3300 identified studies, 11 met the inclusion criteria, spanning 11 countries (published between 2007 and 2025). Integrated and case-based curricula significantly improved pharmacology knowledge compared to traditional lecture-based methods (SMD = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.07-0.64; <i>I</i>² = 75%). Student satisfaction also favours integrated learning (OR = 1.53; 95% CI: 1.16-2.02; <i>I</i>² = 46%). Most included studies were of moderate-to-high methodological quality.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Globally, active and integrated pharmacology curricula foster greater cognitive understanding and learner satisfaction than conventional models. However, significant variability persists in resource-limited settings, leading to unequal competency in prescribing and therapeutic reasoning. Australian pharmacology programmes align broadly with international standards but require greater standardisation in assessment and experiential learning.