MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2145325107

Développement d'un cours en pharmacologie pour les résidents en pédiatrie

2012· article· fr· W2145325107 on OpenAlexaff
Maxime Thibault, Denis Lebel, M Robert, Jean‐François Bussières

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resume Objectif : L’objectif principal consiste a presenter une demarche de developpement d’un cours en pharmacologie d’un credit destine aux residents en pediatrie du Centre hospitalier universitaire Sainte-Justine et dispense par des pharmaciens et des residents en pharmacie, dans une perspective d’interdisciplinarite appliquee au contexte pedagogique. L’objectif secondaire vise a evaluer le niveau de connaissances et de satisfaction des residents en pediatrie lors du premier cours portant sur le circuit du medicament. Methodologie : Il s’agit d’une etude descriptive. Apres avoir revise le programme de formation en pediatrie, les residents en pharmacie ont propose une structure de cours. Un questionnaire a ete prepare afin de verifier les connaissances des residents en pediatrie avant le debut du premier cours et un deuxieme questionnaire a ete prepare afin d’evaluer la satisfaction. Resultats : Cinq themes ont ete retenus soit : 1) le circuit du medicament, 2) la pharmacovigilance, 3) la pharmacocinetique, 4) les interactions medicamenteuses et 5) les preparations magistrales pour un total de 15 heures de formation. Un groupe de 18 residents en pediatrie a participe a ce premier cours. Cinquante pour cent (50 %) ou moins des residents en pediatrie ont obtenu la bonne reponse a 11 des 30 enonces. La satisfaction globale variait entre 94 % et 100 % pour les items verifies. Conclusion : Il existe peu de donnees portant sur la contribution des pharmaciens et residents en pharmacie a la formation de residents en medecine. Cette etude descriptive met en evidence le developpement d’un cours de pharmacologie d’un credit dans le cadre de la residence en pediatrie au CHU Sainte-Justine. Abstract Objective: The main purpose was to present the development process behind a one-credit pharmacology course for residents in pediatrics of the Centre hospitalier universitaire Sainte-Justine , given by pharmacists and pharmacy residents from a multidisciplinary teaching perspective. A secondary objective was to evaluate the level of knowledge and satisfaction of residents in pediatrics during the first course, which dealt with the medication circuit. Methods: This is a descriptive study. After revising the curriculum for training in pediatrics, the pharmacy residents proposed the structure for the course. A questionnaire was prepared to assess the knowledge of residents prior to the first course, and a second questionnaire was prepared to evaluate satisfaction. Results: Five themes were selected: 1) medication circuit; 2) drug safety; 3) pharmacokinetics; 4) drug interactions; and 5) compounded products, for a total of 15 hours of training. A group of 18 residents in pediatrics participated in this first course. Fifty percent (50%) or fewer residents had the correct answer to 11 of 30 questions. Global satisfaction varied between 94% and 100% for verified items. Conclusion: Few data exist regarding the contribution of pharmacists and pharmacy residents to the training of medical residents. This descriptive study highlights the development of a one-credit pharmacology course in the pediatric residency program at the  CHU Sainte-Justine . Key words: Teaching; pediatric residency program; medication circuit; drug safety; pharmacokinetics; drug interactions; medication preparation

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPatient Safety and Medication Errors→French-language works237,207→