A new beginning, plus more of the same / Un nouveau départ sur la voie que nous nous sommes tracée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First, let me say that it is such an honour to be given the opportunity to be the Editor-in-Chief of CPJ. I’d like to pay tribute to my predecessor, Rosemary Killeen, who set a standard of excellence that I hope I can uphold. Having said that, we hope to do more of the same. Our mission, “To attract, disseminate and discuss research and contemporary health care issues and link knowledge to practice,” has not changed and remains as relevant as ever. I hope you agree. Together, we need to make research applicable to pharmacy practice, to have innovations actually incorporated into practice and to battle complacency. CPJ is that vehicle for change. I have just returned from trips abroad to visit pharmacy colleagues in Australia and Japan and they are watching the changes in Canadian pharmacy practice very closely. We are world leaders in pharmacy practice and yet there remains much to be done — having the broadest scope of practice in the world does nothing for patient care if we don’t use it. We have some exciting new opportunities. First, we look forward to working with our new publisher, SAGE Publications, and drawing on their experience with over 680 journals. Second, we have started some new collaborations with our sisters and brothers at the CMAJ (see joint editorial in this issue, the first of many). Third, we are appreciative of a long-term commitment from the Canadian Pharmacists Association for the journal and a plan to work more closely together. Finally, it is my pleasure to announce that Dr. Feng Chang (University of Waterloo) will be joining our Editorial Board, as well as continuing on as an Associate Editor with the journal. We also have 2 new additions to the Associate Editor position: Dr. Derek Jorgenson (University of Saskatchewan) and Dr. Lyne Lalonde (Universite de Montreal), who will help ensure that we continue to have excellent content. As we move into year 145 (yes, it’s been 145 years!) of the journal, we thank you for your support. Let our mantra be evidence, innovation and courage (to change our practice), all in the name of better care for the patients we serve. ■ D’abord, permettez-moi de dire que c’est un honneur d’avoir ete choisi comme redacteur en chef de la Revue des pharmaciens du Canada. Je tiens a rendre hommage a ma predecesseure, Rosemary Killeen, qui a etabli des normes d’excellence que je souhaite maintenir. Je tiens egalement a ce que nous poursuivions dans la meme voie. Notre mission qui consiste a regrouper, a diffuser et a discuter des questions de recherche et des soins de sante contemporaines et a mettre la connaissance en pratique n’a pas changee et demeure toujours aussi pertinente. J’espere que vous etes d’accord. Ensemble, nous devons veiller a ce que la recherche soit applicable a l’exercice de la profession pharmaceutique, nous assurer que les innovations sont integrees a la pratique et combattre le laxisme. La Revue des pharmaciens du Canada est l’outil qui nous permettra de faire tout cela. Je viens tout juste de rentrer d’un voyage au Japon et en Australie, ou j’ai visite des collegues du domaine pharmaceutique qui suivent de pres les changements qui s’operent dans la pratique pharmaceutique canadienne. Nous sommes les chefs de file mondiaux du domaine pharmaceutique, mais il reste beaucoup de travail a faire : nous avons beau avoir le champ d’exercice le plus etendu au monde, il n’ameliore en rien les soins aux patients si nous ne l’exploitons pas. Il y a de nouvelles possibilites a l’horizon. D’abord, nous attendons avec impatience l’occasion de travailler avec notre nouvel editeur, SAGE, et de profiter de l’experience qu’il a acquise en publiant plus de 680 revues. Deuxiemement, nous avons etabli de nouvelles collaborations avec nos confreres et consœurs du Journal de l’Association medicale canadienne (veuillez lire a ce sujet l’editorial conjoint du present numero et qui se veut le premier d’une longue serie). Troisiemement, nous sommes reconnaissants de l’engagement a long terme de l’APhC a l’egard de la revue et de sa decision de collaborer plus etroitement. Finalement, j’ai le plaisir de vous annoncer qu’en plus de continuer d’etre redactrice associee, Feng Chang (Universite de Waterloo) fera maintenant partie de notre comite editorial. Nous avons aussi deux nouveaux redacteurs associes: Derek Jorgenson (Universite de la Saskatchewan) et Lyne Lalonde (Universite de Montreal), qui nous aideront a nous assurer que le contenu de la revue reste pertinent. Nous vous remercions de votre soutien tandis que nous entamons cette 145e annee (croyez-le ou non!) de la revue. Que notre devise soit « La preuve, l’innovation et le courage (de changer notre pratique) » et que ces qualites nous permettent d’ameliorer les soins que nous offrons a nos patients. ■
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 | 0.012 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.026 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.045 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.015 |
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".