MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of feedback from pharmacists in reducing antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia

2011· article· en· W1560370757 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Monica Hazra, Hiroyuki Uchida, Beth Sproule, Gary Remington, Takefumi Suzuki, David C. Mamo

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Psychiatric Research Foundation
KeywordsPolypharmacyAntipsychoticMedical prescriptionMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Psychological interventionPsychiatryPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective was to examine effects of active interventions on physician's prescribing of antipsychotic polypharmacy. Prescriptions for patients with schizophrenia at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Canada were collected in 2006 (n = 648) and 2008 (n = 778). During the intervening period, a pharmacist monitored prescriptions with antipsychotic polypharmacy and contacted corresponding prescribers to provide education on risks of polypharmacy. Moreover, educational sessions on polypharmacy were presented to inpatient and outpatient teams. A three-fold decrease in the prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy was observed between 2006 (18.3%) and 2008 (6.6%). Thus, active monitoring of prescriptions with educational interventions could reduce antipsychotic polypharmacy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatry and Clinical NeurosciencesSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207