MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1974725764 · doi:10.1177/1715163514522763

New year, new challenges

2014· article· fr· W1974725764 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ross T. Tsuyuki

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2014
Typearticle
Languefr
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Well, it’s another year and our new practitioners continue to be confronted with changes and challenges. Bryan Gray continues to work in the Ridgeway Clinic (described previously) but has also been working in another small-format Shoppers Drug Mart (SDM) at the Fort William Clinic and at a full-sized SDM. He describes quite a contrast between the 3 settings. The Fort William clinic is an interesting scenario. The physicians are moving to a new location across town (where they’ll be served by an independent pharmacy), so the pharmacy at Fort William has become very quiet. This has, however, allowed Bryan to meet some of the clinic staff with whom he has been interacting via phone and fax. One nurse asked, “Are you the same Bryan who works at Ridgeway?” The 2 physicians and the nurse then all said, “Oohhh, you’re the pharmacist who’s been sending us all the faxes from Ridgeway!” They laughed and told him to keep up the good work. Bryan feels it’s nice to get that kind of recognition. In reflecting back on his first 6 months in practice, Bryan describes now having a sense of “permanence” or “continuousness.” As he puts it, “I’m now working at my career and profession . . . which is lifelong. I am now a pharmacist.” He describes a sense of belonging and says of his patients, “I am becoming part of their life—becoming their pharmacist.” He also admits to being naive about pharmacists’ expanded scope of practice. He recognizes that the change is complex: imposed quotas and targets, integrating clinical services with dispensary duties, interacting with physicians and getting the rest of the pharmacy team to accept these changes are all challenges. Nevertheless, his plans for 2014 are to persevere. Meanwhile, Reid McDonald and Anita Cumbleton have left Barrhead and moved to Calgary. They realize that in order to practise the way they want, they will have to own their own pharmacy. In the meantime, Anita has taken a position at a large chain store. She is finding the practice environment very different—she feels she is regarded as only a “prescription checker” and someone to deal with insurance issues and complaints. Not surprisingly, she doesn’t feel she is having the same impact on patient’s health and well-being. Reid is working at 2 independent pharmacies, helping them over the holiday season. Reid and Anita have ambitious plans to open their own pharmacy in March. At this point, they are awaiting approval of their plans from the Alberta College of Pharmacists. This will be a small 1000-ft2 pharmacy with a minimal front store and 2 examination/counselling rooms, located in Cochrane, Alberta (about 35 minutes west of Calgary, population 18,750). In reflecting on his first 6 months in the “real world,” Reid feels that “there is so much that we can do, but unfortunately, few pharmacists want to invest in that future.” He feels a certain frustration with other pharmacists not embracing the expanded scope of practice. He feels that they are just “too comfortable and/or lazy—they would rather be told what to do by management.” Anita has seen firsthand that the corporate hierarchy also seems to be a barrier to the uptake of pharmacists’ scope of practice. Those of you following along could probably have predicted some of these events. Finally, a large dose of reality, you might say. It certainly does appear that many different forces are conspiring to prevent pharmacists from providing patient-centred care. But as I’ve said before, what is inspiring about these young pharmacists is how they handle these challenges—with resilience and keeping their eye on the goal. ■

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,251
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,840

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,028
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0090,006
Communication savante0,0200,024
Science ouverte0,0030,015
Intégrité de la recherche0,0090,021
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,2510,109

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,136
Tête enseignante GPT0,344
Écart entre enseignants0,209 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada→Même sujetPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→Travaux en français237 207→