MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103016774 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v62i2.445

Enhancing Safe Medication Use for Pediatric Patients in the Emergency Department

2009· article· en· W2103016774 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Julie Greenall, Pauline Santora, Christine Koczmara, Sylvia Hyland

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsWilliam Osler Health System
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentMedicineMedical emergencyEmergency medicinePharmacistSpecialtyHarmFamily medicinePharmacyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTIONA Canadian study assessing the incidence of medication errors in a pediatric emergency department found prescribing errors in 10.1% of charts reviewed and administration errors in 3.9%.1 The authors cited earlier work by others indicating that preventable errors are significantly more common in the emergency department than in other hospital departments.2,3 This heightened risk in the emergency department is thought to result from the need for medications to be given urgently, which means that many drugs are kept in ward stock. In addition, there is generally no pharmacist review of medication orders originating in the emergency department; patients seen in the emergency department may have only a brief, focused encounter with the physician and nurse before medications are ordered and given; a complete medical and drug history may not be available; physicians and nurses are often caring for several patients at the same time in an environment where interruptions are common; and use of high-alert drugs is common.1,4,5 The authors suggested that of the approximately 50 000 children seen annually in their emergency department, 5000 may be subjected to a medication error, and half of these errors might be clinically significant. Adding to these identified risks for emergency departments in pediatric specialty hospitals is the fact that many Canadian hospitals provide care to pediatric patients alongside adults in the emergency department, which greatly increases the risk of harm associated with an “incorrect patient” error. This risk of harm is compounded when a high-alert medication is involved, as is illustrated by the following case, in which an infant inadvertently received a dose of hydromorphone intended for an adult patient. This incident was highlighted in a recent ISMP Canada Safety Bulletin.6 The current article describes findings from an analysis of the incident and suggests opportunities for pharmacist intervention in the emergency department to reduce the likelihood of medication errors.

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)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207