MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1820056048

Réflexion sur les interruptions dans le circuit du médicament et leurs retombées

2011· article· fr· W1820056048 on OpenAlexaff
M. Raimbault, Jean‐François Bussières, Denis Lebel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesContext (archaeology)Political sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resume Objectif : Discuter des interruptions dans le cir­cuit du medicament en etablissement de sante et de leurs retombees. Mise en contexte : Le circuit du medicament est un processus complexe pour l’acquisition d’un medi­cament, reposant sur l’activite d’une variete d’ac­teurs. Il existe dans le reseau de la sante un probleme lie a des interruptions dans la chaine des differents acteurs, survenant lors de la realisation d’une ou de plusieurs etapes du circuit, et nous pensons que ces interruptions nuisent a la prestation securitaire des soins. Le taux d’interruptions par heure et par sujet, les sources et les motifs des interruptions sont rela­tivement bien decrits dans les milieux infirmiers et medicaux. On note neanmoins que peu d’etudes ont ete realisees au sein des equipes de pharmacie. Les consequences des interruptions sur les erreurs me­dicamenteuses sont quant a elles peu demontrees. Nous proposons des perspectives et des mesures contribuant a limiter les interruptions et les distrac­tions en milieu pharmaceutique. Conclusion : Cet article recense les principaux ecrits en soins infirmiers, medicaux et en services pharmaceutiques et propose une reflexion portant sur les mesures contribuant a la reduction des in­terruptions et des distractions en pharmacie. Abstract Objective: To discuss the consequences of inter­ruptions in the medication circuit in healthcare esta­blishments. Context: The acquisition of a drug can be a com­plex process within the medication circuit, relying on the activity of several persons. In the healthcare system, problems exist related to interruptions in the sequence of actions of the various persons in­volved, occurring either during one or many steps of the circuit; and we believe that these may hinder safe delivery of care. The rate of interruptions per hour and by subject, along with the sources and the reasons for interruptions, are relatively well descri­bed in medical and nursing practice. However, few studies have been done involving pharmacy teams. The consequences of interruptions on medication errors are in themselves poorly documented. We propose perspectives and methods that help to limit interruptions and distractions in pharmacy practice. Conclusion: This article surveys the main litera­ture in nursing care, medicine, and pharmacy ser­vices; and it outlines methods contributing to the reduction of interruptions and distractions in phar­macy practice. Key words: interruptions, attention, impact, in­fluence, consequence, medication error

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.414
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.019 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207