Evaluation of Method for Pinpointing Areas for Improvement in Practical Training at Hospital Pharmacy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For training in the provision of drug information in practical training conducted at a hospital pharmacy,we evaluated specific behavioral objectives (SBOs) for 14 items at the master level,and processed the results by correspondence structural (CS) analysis.We then determined whether CS analysis was a useful method of pinpointing areas for improvement.As one conclusion,it was thought that a more concrete improvement plan based on specific improvement items could be developed from the results for experience of the practical training and master level investigation table obtained through the CS analysis.As another,we felt that the improvement items for training in the provision of drug information could be determined by comparing the improvement levels of the CS analysis.It was therefore considered that CS analysis was a useful method of pinpointing areas for improvement during the period that hospital pharmacy training was being conducted.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it