L'intérêt des formulaires des hôpitaux pour améliorer les pratiques de prescription
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les formulaires des hôpitaux, orientés par les comités pharmaceutiques et thérapeutiques, sont créés pour optimiser l'utilisation des médicaments, car ils déterminent et désignent les médicaments de choix pour favoriser des prescriptions rationnelles, limiter les risques pour le patient, réduire les coûts et améliorer les résultats cliniques. Des lignes directrices et un cadre guident les évaluations critiques des médicaments inscrits dans la liste de formulaires. Cependant, il est peut-être possible d'améliorer et de standardiser le mode d'adoption d'un changement aux formulaires dans les hôpitaux canadiens. Le changement au formulaire d'un hôpital ontarien a révélé de graves problèmes associés à ce processus, y compris l'importance d'un plan d'exécution solide, de ressources adaptées, de la formation du personnel soignant et de l'acceptation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".