MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465615702 · doi:10.3390/ijerph13070720

Medication Literacy in a Cohort of Chinese Patients Discharged with Acute Coronary Syndrome

2016· article· en· W2465615702 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zhuqing Zhong, Feng Zheng, Yuna Guo, Aijing Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersXiangya Hospital, Central South UniversityCentral South UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineLiteracyHealth literacyProspective cohort studyCohortAcute coronary syndromeCohort studyEmergency medicineFamily medicineInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at investigating medication literacy of discharged patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in China, and the important determinants of medication literacy among them. For this purpose, we conducted a prospective cohort study. Patient's demographic and clinical data were retrieved from hospital charts and medication literacy was measured by instructed interview using the Chinese version of Medication Literacy Questionnaire on Discharged Patient between 7 and 30 days after the patient was discharged from the hospital. The results show that medication literacy for the surveyed patients was insufficient: >20% did not have adequate knowledge on the types of drugs and the frequency that they need to take the drugs, >30% did not know the name of and the dosage of the drugs they are taking, and >70% did not have adequate knowledge on the effects and side effects of the drugs they are taking. Our research indicated that medication literacy scores decreased with age but increased with education. The number of medicines the discharged patient took with them and days between discharge and interview were not associated with medication literacy levels.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207