MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2332468610 · doi:10.1177/171516350513800704

The Truer Picture of the Continuing Education Preferences of NL Pharmacists: Can We Apply What We Learned to Managing Diseases Such as HIV?

2005· article· en· W2332468610 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gerry Mugford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scalePharmacistMedicineFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)DiseaseContinuing educationScale (ratio)Health careContinuing medical educationPharmacyMedical educationPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The treatment of HIV disease is made more complex by rapid changes in disease management. Two primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the continuing education (CE) needs and preferences of pharmacists and to utilize this information to develop CE HIV disease management strategies. Our hypothesis was that current knowledge of HIV disease management is outdated and that CE related to HIV should be delivered in ways that meet the preferences of pharmacists. Methods: A 14-page needs assessment (NA) was developed to assess the CE needs and preferences of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) pharmacists and their knowledge of HIV disease management. The NA was validated by pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and social workers from Memorial University of Newfoundland and the Health Care Corporation of St. John's. Respondents' answers were scored using a six-point Likert scale. Space was available for respondents to provide open answers and opinions related to the questionnaire, CE, and HIV. Piloting and feedback suggested the NA could be completed in 20–30 minutes. The NA was mailed to 470 pharmacists. Results: Thirty percent of the pharmacists returned a completed questionnaire. Mean scores (MS) were calculated for specific CE topics. The top three CE topics were: update professional skills (MS = 4.46); current standards of care (MS = 3.9); and professional practice standards (MS = 3.85). CE topics for clinical skills were also highlighted and included pharmacology and therapeutics, infectious disease, and patient education. CE topics specific to HIV included drug interactions, resistance, management of adverse events, opportunistic infections, alternative therapies, HAART therapy, post-exposure prophylaxis, and pregnancy in HIV/AIDS. Most pharmacists (81%) had access to Internet and e-mail (76%). Few respondents had access to teleconference (19%) and videoconference (11%). Pharmacists' preferences for CE delivery times were workday evenings (2–3 hours), weekend half-day, and workday half-day. Conferences, correspondences courses, structured courses, and seminars were the preferred delivery modes. Conclusions/Implications: Pharmacists in NL appear to have specific educational needs. Although the study achieved a lower-than-expected response rate, perhaps partly due to its length, most respondents indicated that computer-based technology could enhance the delivery of CE. Continuous, discipline-specific, real-time assessment of educational needs may be essential for optimum management of patients with HIV. It is likely the findings reflect the needs of pharmacists across the country, especially those outside urban areas. The preferences identified in this study could apply to delivering CE for a variety of diseases.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→