MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1974709368 · doi:10.3821/145.2.cpj52

Renewed Optimism in Manitoba about Regulatory Change to Expand Scope of Practice

2012· article· en· W1974709368 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kathie Lynas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationGovernment (linguistics)LawPharmacyPharmacistPolitical scienceMedical prescriptionScope (computer science)LegislatureCraftScope of practicePublic administrationMedicineHistoryHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pharmacy regulators and pharmacists in Manitoba are hoping they're nearing the end of a lengthy and sometimes bumpy journey towards a significant expansion of pharmacist authority in the province. If all goes well, revised regulations giving force to legislation passed in 2006 will be approved by Manitoba pharmacists before summer, says Shawn Bugden, president of the regulatory body, the Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association (MPhA). “I think everyone is frustrated at how long it's taking,” says Mr. Bugden. “We have been working hard with our partners in government to craft and revise the regulations document and that has taken a long time.” When the revisions to the Pharmaceutical Act passed in December 2006, the proposed new scope of pharmacy practice made Manitoba one of the leaders in the country. Pharmacists were to be given the authority to immunize, order lab tests, independently prescribe continued care prescriptions, and to prescribe medical devices and a list of medications for some minor ailments. After passage, the next step was to draft a Regulations Policy Document to put before the members, as Manitoba is the one Canadian province that requires pharmacists to vote on regulations. The membership rejected the first version in March 2008; after revisions were made, members voted 84% in favour in November 2010. The final stage of regulation development, in concert with government, proved more complicated than anticipated. More than a year later, the MPhA had organized special meetings of members beginning February 21, 2012, to present and explain the final regulations. However, there have been changes since the 2010 membership vote. “It is now clear that the regulations in their final legal form will require a ratification vote by the membership,” says Mr. Bugden, noting that while many of the revisions are “subtle,” others are substantial enough to require another vote on the package. The Manitoba Society of Pharmacists (MSP) has expressed frustration over the lengthy process over the past 15 months but is pleased with the latest developments. “I would like to say we are positive and more optimistic than we have been in a while. And we are prepared to put our best effort into seeing the regulations move forward,” says Mel Baxter, president of MSP's board of directors and a community pharmacy manager in Morris. “But this includes keeping in mind that there was a reason for the regulations being rejected in 2007 and we need to see and analyze the latest revisions before taking a position on whether the membership will support them.”

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.015
Scholarly communication0.0150.005
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0140.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.446
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.050 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada→Same topicPharmaceutical industry and healthcare→French-language works237,207→