Highlights of the Cleveland Clinic Pharmacy Practice Model Summit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In November 2010, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) kicked off its Pharmacy Practice Model Initiative (PPMI) with the PPMI Summit in Dallas, Texas. The PPMI is intended to provide direction for pharmacy leaders to advance the practice of health-system pharmacy within their institutions. The consensus recommendations of the PPMI Summit were published in the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy and can be found on the ASHP website.1 The PPMI is timely for the profession, as it defines the pharmacist’s role in dealing with the challenges of health care reform, rising prescription drug costs, new technology, and complex drug therapy regimens. The pharmacy leadership at the Cleveland Clinic was inspired by the PPMI Summit and wanted to spread the inspiration to the more than 800 pharmacy employees of the institution’s integrated health system, which comprises 10 hospitals and 17 family health and ambulatory surgical centers, primarily located in northeastern Ohio, and other facilities in Weston, Florida; Las Vegas, Nevada; Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
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 | 0.033 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".