MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1845985584 · doi:10.1093/ajhp/57.8.747

Community pharmacist outreach program directed at physicians treating congestive heart failure

2000· article· en· W1845985584 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher Turner, Patrick S. Parfrey, Kurt Ryan, Robert Miller, Alexandra L. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)Memorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigoxinMedicineFurosemideHeart failureMedical prescriptionACE inhibitorInternal medicineAngiotensin-converting enzymeDigitoxinOutreachPharmacistPopulationPharmacyPharmacologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The predictive value of digoxin and furosemide treatment for identifying patients receiving treatment for congestive heart failure (CHF), the use of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in this population, and the ability of a pharmacist outreach program to address underutilization of ACE inhibitors were studied. All physicians and owner-managers of community pharmacies on Newfoundland's Avalon Peninsula were asked to participate in the study. Pharmacists who agreed to participate were asked to list patients of the participating physicians with prescriptions for (1) furosemide and digoxin with and without an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin II-receptor inhibitor and (2) an ACE inhibitor. Physicians were visited by a pharmacist and asked whether each of their patients receiving digoxin and furosemide was being treated for CHF and to identify further cases of CHF among their patients receiving an ACE inhibitor. Intervention-group physicians received academic detailing on the use and dosage of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II-receptor inhibitors for CHF. Both groups were reinterviewed after three months to establish what if any changes in therapy had occurred for each patient discussed during the first visit. The positive predictive value of digoxin and furosemide treatment for identifying patients receiving treatment for CHF was 94%. Seventy-six percent of patients identified by physicians as CHF patients who were taking digoxin and furosemide were treated with an ACE inhibitor. Thirty-six percent of patients treated with an ACE inhibitor for CHF received the targeted dosage. Four physicians stated that the outreach visit influenced their prescribing, but there was no significant difference in ACE inhibitor prescribing between the intervention and control groups. A pharmacist outreach program involving the use of prescription records and academic detailing did not affect prescribing or dosages of ACE inhibitors but demonstrated value as a quality assurance tool.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Health-System PharmacySame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207