MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2172156887

Ruptures d’approvisionnement en médicaments : Point de vue des pharmaciens hospitaliers au Québec

2013· article· fr· W2172156887 on OpenAlexaffabout
Isabelle Barthélémy, Jean‐François Bussières

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

8 . Le questionnaire comportait un volet demographique (4 questions), un profil des consequences administratives (9 questions) et cliniques (16 questions) ainsi qu'un profil des perceptions (24 questions). Les pharmaciens interroges ont ete informes de la publication afferente a ce sondage et y ont donne leur accord par ecrit en acceptant de repondre par ecrit au sondage et en remettant la copie de leur reponse au chercheur. Au total, 46 pharmaciens ont repondu au questionnaire, ce qui correspond a un taux de reponse de 92 %. Ils exercaient en centres de sante et de services sociaux (48 %), en centres universitaires (43 %) et autres categories d'etablissements (9 %). Ils agissaient au sein de leur etablissement a titre de chef de departement (54 %), d'adjoint au chef ou de coordonnateur (22 %), de pharmacien (22 %) ou hors etablissement (2 %). Tous les pharmaciens interroges ont affirme avoir ete personnellement touches par les problemes de ruptures d'approvisionnements de medicaments au cours des 12 derniers mois. En ce qui concerne les consequences administratives, 85 % des pharmaciens ont affirme que la penurie de medicaments les avait forces a modifier au moins un aspect de leur pratique clinique (p. ex. medicaments disponibles, modifications de protocoles ou de feuilles d'ordonnances prerediges, stockage de cabinets automatises decentralises, etc.) : un aspect (21 %), deux aspects (15 %), trois aspects (10 %), plus de trois aspects (46 %). La majorite (98 %) des personnes sondees ont affirme que la penurie de medicaments avait augmente leur charge de travail quotidienne pendant une a deux semaines (10 %), trois a quatre semaines (10 %), plus de quatre semaines (71 %), a raison de moins de 15 minutes par jour (11 %), de 15 a 30 minutes (40 %), de 30 a 60 minutes (27 %), de plus de 60 minutes (20 %). De plus, 65 % ont affirme que la penurie

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→