Nova Scotia pharmacists' knowledge of, experiences with and perception of factors interfering with their ability to provide emergency contraceptive pill consultations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to explore pharmacists' knowledge of, experiences with and perception of factors interfering with their ability to provide non-prescription emergency contraceptive pill consultations in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. METHODS: A self-administered paper questionnaire was mailed, using Dillman's tailored design method, to all pharmacists (n = 1123) registered with the Nova Scotia College of Pharmacists. KEY FINDINGS: The response rate was 53.0% (595/1123), with 451 respondents working in community practice. Most respondents reported that they had provided consultations for the emergency contraceptive product Plan B since it became available without a prescription (93.6%), and that Plan B is kept behind the pharmacy counter (83.6%). Pharmacists most frequently (47.8%) reported spending 6-10 min providing Plan B consultations. Respondents were generally knowledgeable about Plan B; however, only 39.2% knew that it can be effective for up to 5 days and 69.3% knew that the incidence of vomiting is less than 50%. The factors interfering the most with providing Plan B consultations were lack of privacy (46.1%) and lack of staff to cover during the consultation (50.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In general, Nova Scotia pharmacists are knowledgeable about emergency contraceptive pills; however, education regarding effective timing for use of such pills would be helpful. Private areas for counselling and consideration of pharmacy staffing schedules in community pharmacies may help address pharmacist concerns regarding their ability to provide Plan B consultations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".