Consumer over-the-counter usage and attitudes: a survey in one Canadian city
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims and objectives To describe general aspects of over-the-counter (OTC) product use and attitudes in the community. Setting One Canadian city. Method The approach was cross-sectional and descriptive in design. Questionnaires were mailed to 2547 residents. The questionnaire covered OTC purchases and use and experience with minor illnesses. Key findings The response rate was 57.2%. Respondents reported using an average of 2.7 different products within a 6-month period and were reasonably satisfied with them. The majority (78.9%) could not recall having a side effect with use. Label-reading claims were high, with 4.0 package sections accessed at first purchase. The majority (86.5%) had received OTC-related advice from pharmacists at some point in the past. The main reason for not asking was having no difficulty in selecting what they needed. Conclusion This report confirms the broad use of OTC medicines. Citizens appear to have reasonably healthy attitudes to these medicines and do seek pharmacists for assistance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".