MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162634266 · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-5-31

Variation in the psychosocial determinants of the intention to prescribe hormone therapy prior to the release of the Women's Health Initiative trial: a survey of general practitioners and gynaecologists in France and Quebec

2005· article· en· W2162634266 on OpenAlexafffundabout
France Légaré, Gaston Godin, Virginie Ringa, Sylvie Dodin, Lucile Turcot, Joanna Norton

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôpital Saint-François d'Assise
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorPsychosocialMedicineVignetteNorm (philosophy)Logistic regressionNormativeSpecialtyFamily medicineMedical prescriptionPsychologySocial psychologyClinical psychologyControl (management)NursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Theory-based approaches are advocated to improve our understanding of prescription behaviour. This study is an application of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) with additional variables. It was designed to assess which variables were associated with the intention to prescribe hormone therapy (HT). In addition, variations in the measures across medical specialities (GPs and gynaecologists) and across countries (France and Quebec) were investigated. METHODS: A survey among 2,000 doctors from France and 1,044 doctors from Quebec was conducted. Data were collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire. A clinical vignette was used to elicit doctors' opinions. The following TPB variables were assessed: attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, attitudinal beliefs, normative beliefs and power of control beliefs. Additional variables (role belief, moral norm and practice pattern-related factors) were also assessed. A stepwise logistic regression was used to assess which variables were associated with the intention to prescribe HT. GPs and gynaecologists were compared to each other within countries and the two countries were compared within the specialties. RESULTS: Overall, 1,085 doctors from France returned their questionnaire and 516 doctors from Quebec (response rate = 54% and 49%, respectively). In the overall regression model, power of control beliefs, moral norm and role belief were significantly associated with intention (all at p < 0.0001). The models by specialty and country were: for GPs in Quebec, power of control beliefs (p < 0.0001), moral norm (p < 0.01) and cytology and hormonal dosage (both at p < 0.05); for GPs in France, power of control beliefs and role belief (both at p < 0.0001) and perception of behavioural control (p < 0.05) and cessation of menses (p < 0.01); for gynaecologists in Quebec, moral norm and power of control beliefs (both at p = 0.01); and for gynaecologists in France, power of control beliefs (p < 0.0001), and moral norm, role belief and lipid profile (all at p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In both countries, compared with GPs, intention to prescribe HT was higher for gynaecologists. Psychosocial determinants of doctors' intention to prescribe HT varied according to the specialty and the country thus, suggesting an influence of contextual factors on these determinants.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207