Postgraduation employment experiences of new pharmacists in Ontario in 2012–2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A recent shift in the pharmacy workforce away from stable, long-term employment has been reported by students. Few data exist regarding the postgraduation employment experiences of students. METHODS: An electronic survey exploring postgraduation employment experiences was distributed to 2012-2013 graduates from the Universities of Waterloo and Toronto (including the International Pharmacy Graduate program). Follow-up interviews were undertaken to explore survey findings. RESULTS: THREE KEY THEMES EMERGED: 1) the rising prevalence of the "survival job" in pharmacy; 2) tension between professional satisfaction and practical considerations; and 3) an employment market characterized by personal networks, not merit. DISCUSSION: Fewer students are securing full-time positions with benefits, and more are relying upon temporary, part-time work with multiple employers. Implications of this employment pattern for the ability to form pharmacist-patient relationships and provide pharmaceutical care require further investigation. CONCLUSION: Further exploration of themes identified in this study is required, as is annual study of the experiences of new graduates. Their experiences will shape the future of professional practice and are of interest to academics, educators and practitioners.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".