Expanding pharmacy roles and the interprofessional experience in primary healthcare: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pharmacist role is undergoing significant changes which are reshaping the way primary healthcare is delivered throughout England. Due to increased physician workload and focus on primary healthcare, the pharmacist role has expanded to provide enhanced patient services, integrating into general practice (GP) settings and working more closely as a member of the healthcare team. However, the experiences of pharmacists and team members are yet to be explored. The proposed study aims to explore the experiences, thoughts, and perceptions of a purposive sample of pharmacists, physicians, and nurses working in 10 GP clinics throughout the southeast of England. Interprofessional relationships, power dynamics, changing professional roles, and barriers and facilitators to the integration of the pharmacist role will be explored. An exploratory multiple case study design will be used to investigate interprofessional experiences within and between clinics. In-depth interviews will be completed with each participant. A thematic analysis will identify themes and patterns from the interview data. Results are expected to produce recommendations to help facilitate the integration of pharmacists in their new role and will have implications for interprofessional collaboration and interprofessional education which are important for delivering safe and effective care.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".