MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077187626 · doi:10.1177/1078155214556522

Establishing an international baseline for medication safety in oncology: Findings from the 2012 ISMP International Medication Safety Self Assessment® for Oncology

2014· article· en· W2077187626 on OpenAlex
Julie Greenall, Ann Shastay, Allen J. Vaida, U David, Philip E. Johnson, Joe O’Leary, Carole Chambers

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncologySnapshot (computer storage)Family medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 2012, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada (ISMP Canada) collaborated with an international panel of oncology practitioners to develop the ISMP International Medication Safety Self Assessment® for Oncology. This self-assessment was designed to assist oncology practitioners in hospitals, ambulatory care centers, and office practice settings throughout the world to evaluate safe practices related to medication use in the oncology setting and to identify opportunities for improvement. INSTRUMENT DESIGN: The self-assessment consists of 175 items organized into 10 key elements subdivided into 18 core characteristics of safe medication use. Assessment results were submitted via a secure online portal. The online program allows participants to print and graph their results and to compare their findings with those of similar organizations both nationally and internationally. METHODS: Complimentary access to the self-assessment was made available for a seven-month "snapshot" period in 2012. RESULTS: A total of 352 organizations from 13 countries submitted assessment results. Key opportunities for improvement were identified in five areas: implementation of the World Health Organization recommendations for management of vinCRIStine and other vinca alkaloids, safe management of oral chemotherapy, labeling of distal ends of intravenous tubing, implementation of technology-based safeguards, and patient education. CONCLUSIONS: This international snapshot provides important data about the level of implementation of system-based safeguards in oncology practice, key improvement opportunities, and represents a baseline for future improvement efforts. A collaborative approach to identifying vulnerabilities and developing solutions for safe medication use in oncology will enhance the care of patients with cancer internationally.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.453 · 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