Physician agreement regarding the expansion of pharmacist professional activities in the management of patients with asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma control remains suboptimal in Canada. Expansion of pharmacist's professional activities offers the opportunity to improve the interdisciplinary management of patients with asthma. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the level of agreement of physicians regarding the expansion of pharmacists' professional activities in the management of asthma patients. METHODS: We conducted a survey of randomly selected Quebec physicians in family medicine, paediatrics and emergency medicine. A 102-item questionnaire, including 10 questions regarding pharmacist's expanded professional activities, was sent using the Tailored Design Method. Questions were answered on a 6-point Likert-like scale (0 - strong disagreement to 5 - strong agreement). RESULTS: With a 56% response rate, 421 (250 family medicine, 115 paediatric and 56 emergency medicine) physicians participated; the median years of practice (25%, 75%) was 13 (5-21) years and 69% of respondents were women. Physicians were in favour of the expansion of pharmacist's professional activities with strong endorsement rates (rating of ≥4 on a maximum of 5) exceeding 60% for all but three activities: suggesting a written action plan to the physician (55%), adjusting the dose of prescribed asthma medication to achieve a therapeutic target (52%) and offering spirometry testing in pharmacies (45%). Emergency physicians, physicians with fewer years of practice, and those with a favourable perception of an interprofessional approach were associated with higher endorsement of these activities. CONCLUSION: Physicians are favourable to the expansion of pharmacist activities in the management of patients with asthma. More complex activities were less frequently endorsed. The characteristics of strong intenders have been identified.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".