Perception and Use of Guidelines and Interprofessional Dynamics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Focusing on guidelines governing medication use in nursing homes, in this study we explore the ways in which clinical professionals perceive and apply treatment guidelines, and how interprofessional interactions shape the delivery of pharmacotherapies to residents. DESIGN AND METHODS: Seventeen semistructured interviews were conducted with physicians, nursing staff, and consultant pharmacists in 4 purposefully selected nursing homes in Michigan. RESULTS: Perceptions of guidelines varied by clinical groups, with physicians perceiving them as reference tools, whereas nurses and consultant pharmacists saw them as rules to which clinical practices should adhere. Key external factors including resident and family demands, economic constraints, limited face-to-face contact, and the organizational hierarchy further drove clinical personnel to use guidelines differently and induced interprofessional conflicts. These negative interactions make facility-wide guideline adherence challenging by undermining the regulatory role of consultant pharmacists. IMPLICATIONS: This study provides important insight on work-related factors that hinder the implementation of treatment guidelines in nursing homes.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it