MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330135488 · doi:10.1177/1715163513506370

Pharmacy’s role in a modern health continuum

2013· article· en· W2330135488 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
James P. Kehrer, Greg Eberhart, Margaret Wing, Karen Horon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Pharmacists AssociationAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacyMedicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing a health care system that puts people at the center of their own care and uses all available resources as effectively as possible has become a consistent goal of most governments. Achieving this goal requires different health professionals to work in collaboration with each other to meet the health needs of patients. In order for that to happen, governments must work with all key professional groups to use all available resources of the system most effectively and, importantly, pharmacists must be recognized as the professional that coordinates drug therapy management. In addition, governments must put in place policies and a regulatory and funding environment that facilitates team-based care and acknowledges and supports the professional competencies of all health professions. These basic points were made in a White Paper prepared for the Alberta Minister of Health. This article, derived from that paper, was prepared to help pharmacists and other pharmacy organizations understand the critical steps needed for individuals and the health system to fully experience and benefit from pharmacists’ skills and services.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.050
Scholarly communication0.0190.013
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0090.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations96
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du CanadaSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207