MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1912426284 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v57i3.366

Expanded Technician Roles versus Patient Safety: Finding the Balance

2004· article· en· W1912426284 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robin J. Ensom, Michael Tierney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnicianPharmacy technicianCertificationPharmacyPharmacistPatient safetyQuality (philosophy)NursingPatient careMedical educationMedicineHealth careEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improvements in the formal training of pharmacy technicians and development of institution-based technician training and certification programs, together with the need to expand the pharmacist’s direct patient care role, have facilitated expansion of the technician’s role. The evidence in favour of this approach is strong. A recent review summarized the results of 10 studies, including research from one of our own institutions, that evaluated “tech-check-tech” systems; the error rates were equivalent to those occurring with a pharmacist final check. Similarly, there is good evidence that with adequate training and quality assurance, pharmacy technicians can perform other roles, such as verified order entry, that have typically been the domain of hospital pharmacists.

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)0.099
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0990.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.027
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy→Same topicPatient Safety and Medication Errors→French-language works237,207→