Avis et commentaires pour d'étudiants pour Développement de médicaments par Université de Californie à San Diego

Use full

useful

good

nice

The information provided by this course was very helpful for someone who is new to the topic and I do feel much better informed as a result. The course itself however is not the most professionally presented. The recordings are of face to face lectures provided to an actual class of students. As such they are designed for online learning where there is no possibility to interact with the speakers and students don't have access to any other course materials. The speakers in the phase 3 and marketing sections didn't really follow their slide packs.

The overall material was good. However, the course was not structured as an online course, rather an online posting of in class lectures. This made it difficult to hear the questions of the students as the questions were not repeated by the lecturer and therefore we received an answer to a question we didn't hear. Also, because of the lecture nature, a lot of information was missing from the slides as it was spoken information.

Several of the questions seemed irrelevant to the actual conduct of clinical research. I also wholeheartedly disagree with #7 in the phase III quiz. The real answer depends on whose perspective you're coming from. Maybe for the pharmaceutical company getting to market is most important, but to the patient I'm pretty sure efficacy is more important to him/her than how quickly other people can make money.

Course content was quite good up to the last third of the course. From my POV the lecturers of the third part of 'Drug Development' haven't done a good job in structuring and explaining the different aspects of Phase III and Phase IV trials. It was more jumping from one anecdotal evidence to the next while losing sight of the bigger picture.

The course is quite informative. I just found kind of difficult to fully understand some concepts because of the speed they are delivered. Maybe for some talks, more and more detailed slides would help for a better flow and understanding of important concepts. Overall, I enjoyed it and certainly learned a lot.

Informative and engaging in the first two weeks of lecture, however the lecturers on the third week were not that enthusiastic and I felt that I didn't gain much knowledge on them. I would suggest to refrain having two lecturers at the same time to maximize the time on the topic itself.

This wasn't really great, it is a recording of several seminar presentations that were recorded several years ago, for this, the landscape has changed but the content hasn't, also, as this was planned for a in person presentation, the format is not optimal for a MOOC.

Me ha gustado bastante, he aprendido mucho con el curso. Aún así hay un aspecto que me afecta y es que s habla muy poco de la legislación a nivel europeo y eso hace que me sea menos util para mi formación.

Week 3 lectures were not as in-depth as hoped and filled with too many personal anecdotes for the time allowed. Much more could have been said if these had been skipped.

Would be nice to update this course. The slides are from 2013 and I am listening in 2020. A lot has changed in the pharmaceutical market since in that time.

The name of the course should be something a la 'Clincal trials and drug admistration agencies'. It is not the development of a drug.

it was a great learning with coursera. it was indeed an informative course and glad hearing the prominent and experienced speakers

Was informative. The lectures could have been more structured and slides more detailed.

US- centric course. The content in week 3 was not well explained and felt rushed.

More emphasis on the filing and submissions and approvals need to be there

Weeks 1 and 2 are great, but the classes of week 3 need more organization.

good up to phase 2 (included). Phase 3 and after was less informative

It's from 2013. Good overview but time for an update.

would like an specialization on this matter

I gained knowledge

goooooood