MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1572000654 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v60i5.199

Development and Initial Evaluation of a Software-Based Clinical Workload Measurement System for Pharmacists

2007· article· en· W1572000654 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Adrienne J. Lindblad, Alison Alleyne, Jason Howorko

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsRed Deer Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadPsychological interventionMedicineClinical pharmacyPharmacistPharmacyMedical recordDocumentationIntervention (counseling)Family medicineNursingComputer scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background: Implementation of a new pharmacy computer system allowed the creation of a workload measurement system that focused on pharmacists’ direct patient care activities. Objective: To describe a workload and outcomes measurement system that was developed within Meditech software and to document its use in a community hospital. Methods: A numeric system was developed for recording pharmacists’ workload when documenting interventions in patients’ medical records. Interventions were categorized according to the nature of the drug-related problem, the anticipated patient outcome, and acceptance of the intervention by the prescriber. Pharmacists’ clinical interventions were quantified over a 6-month period. Results: Fourteen pharmacists tabulated a total of 2645 interventions over the period January to June 2006. The mean number of interventions per pharmacist per clinical shift (± standard deviation) was 4.6 ± 3.4. A broad range of drug-related problems was identified. For every intervention, a mean of 1.4 clinical, 0.8 humanistic, and 0.1 economic outcomes were recorded. Only 3.2% of the pharmacists’ recommendations had been rejected by prescribers at the time of documentation. Conclusions: Numerous drug-related problems were identified by pharmacists, with various anticipated outcomes. Most of the interventions proposed by pharmacists were accepted by the prescribers. The workload measurement system allowed pharmacists to document their clinical activities and the anticipated outcomes of their interventions.  RESUME Historique : La mise en place d’un nouveau systeme informatique de pharmacie a permis de creer un systeme de mesure de la charge de travail des pharmaciens, principalement axe sur leurs interventions de soins directs aux patients. Objectif : Decrire le systeme de mesure de la charge de travail et des resultats developpe a partir du progiciel Meditech et documenter son utilisation dans un hopital communautaire. Methodes : Un systeme numerique a ete elabore pour enregistrer la charge de travail des pharmaciens parallelement a la consignation des interventions dans les dossiers medicaux des patients. Les interventions ont ete categorisees selon la nature du probleme relie a la pharmacotherapie, le resultat therapeutique escompte, et l’acceptation de l’intervention par le prescripteur. Les interventions cliniques des pharmaciens ont ete quantifiees sur une periode de six mois. Resultats : En tout, 2645 interventions realisees par 14 pharmaciens ont ete recensees pour la periode allant de janvier a juin 2006. Le nombre moyen d’interventions par pharmacien et par quart de travail (± l’ecart-type) etait de 4,6 ± 3,4. Un large eventail de problemes relies a la pharmacotherapie ont ete deceles. Pour chaque intervention, on a recense 1,4 resultat sur le plan clinique, 0,8 sur le plan humain et 0,1 sur le plan economique. Seulement 3,2 % des recommandations des pharmaciens avaient ete rejetees par les prescripteurs au moment de la consignation. Conclusions : De nombreux problemes relies a la pharmacotherapie avec des resultats therapeutiques escomptes varies ont ete deceles par les pharmaciens. La plupart des interventions proposees par les pharmaciens ont ete acceptees par les prescripteurs. Ce systeme de mesure de la charge de travail a permis aux pharmaciens de consigner leurs activites cliniques et les resultats escomptes de leurs interventions.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.401
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.086 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→