MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148753481 · doi:10.1177/2050312115585040

Pharmacy students screening for pre-diabetes/diabetes with a validated questionnaire in community pharmacies during their experiential rotation in Alberta, Canada

2015· article· en· W2148753481 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hoan Linh Banh, Sheldon J. Chow, Shuai Li, Nancy A. Letassy, Cheryl Cox, Andrew Cave

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacyDiabetes mellitusOverweightType 2 diabetesFamily medicineObesityInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Type 2 diabetes is a major condition impacting morbidity, mortality, and health care costs in Canada. Pharmacists are very accessible and are in an ideal position to promote public health education. The primary goal of this study was to incorporate public health promotion and education into a community pharmacy experiential education rotation for fourth year pharmacy students to screen for the risk of pre-diabetes/diabetes in adults. A secondary goal was to determine the frequency of common risk factors for pre-diabetes/diabetes in adults in the community setting. METHOD: Fourth year pharmacy students were invited to recruit all adults 25 years or older attending community pharmacies to complete a pre-diabetes/diabetes risk assessment questionnaire. If the participants were at risk, the participants were provided education about risk reduction for developing pre-diabetes/diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 340 participants completed a risk assessment questionnaire. Over 90% of people approached agreed to complete a risk assessment questionnaire. The common risk factors were overweight (154/45%), hypertension (102/30%), taking medications for hypertension (102/30%), and having symptoms of diabetes (111/33%). The ethnic minorities have 2.56 (confidence interval = 1.48-44.1) times greater odds of having a family history of diabetes compared to non-minority subjects. CONCLUSION: Pharmacy students are able to screen community-based patients for pre-diabetes/diabetes risks. The most common risk factors presented were overweight, hypertension, and taking medications for hypertension.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE Open MedicineSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207