MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998634611 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v66i2.1249

Drug Shortages: The Survey Says . . .

2013· article· en· W1998634611 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Douglas Sellinger

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortagePharmacyHarmMedicineFamily medicineWork (physics)Public relationsMedical educationPsychologyPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)EngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My daughter is graduating from high school and has completed her university application. She will be enter ing a pre-pharmacy program and is thinking about a career in hospital pharmacy, so perhaps the apple really doesn’t fall too far from the tree. I recall the upheaval that her starting school a dozen years ago created in our family. Every year, she became involved in more scholastic and extracurricular activities. As the associated parental work increased, our ability to accomplish the tasks also grew, in part because we gave up other activities. In many ways, the Canadian drug shortage situation has had the same effect on pharmacists. The Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists (CSHP) recently joined the Canadian Pharmacists Association and the Canadian Medical Association in surveying members about drug shortages and releasing a statement about the results to the media. 1 If you missed it on your local news broadcast, don’t feel bad: media pick-up of the story was limited and so was the interest of our politicians. Perhaps what was missing from the story was the aspect of potential patient harm. The diligent and timely mitigation of drug shortages by hospital and community pharmacists and by physicians has resulted in many positive patient outcomes, but these tend not to make great news stories. Survey results indicated that up to 20% of patients have been affected by shortages. The top 3 impacts for patients were delayed access to needed medication, use of a less effective medication or formulation, and increased risk of adverse effects. Hospital pharmacists who responded to the survey indicated that patients experienced delays in acquiring their medications, additional cost associated with alternative medications, and confusion related to changes in medication or formulation. Of 215 hospital pharmacists who responded, more than half reported trouble sourcing a medication for a patient during their most recent shift, and almost two-thirds indicated difficulty getting a medication in the previous week. Hospital pharma cists’ strategies to mitigate the effects of drug shortages included communication within the pharmacy, hospital, and health region; rationing or restricting the use of existing supplies; obtaining medications from another source; compounding

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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 head0.271
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207