MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Bringing provincial improvements to oral chemotherapy prescribing through co-ordinated regional initiatives.

2016· article· en· W2590088447 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vicky Simanovski, Noor Ani Ahmad, Leonard Kaizer, Erin Redwood, Kathy Vu, Colleen Fox, Elaine Meertens, Monika K. Krzyzanowska

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAuditMedical prescriptionQuality managementGovernment (linguistics)Agency (philosophy)Family medicineNursingBusinessService (business)Accounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

107 Background: Oral chemotherapy delivery is complex, making safe medication practices a high priority. Cancer Care Ontario, the provincial government agency responsible for continually improving cancer services in Ontario, undertook a jurisdiction-wide quality improvement initiative to ensure that all oral chemotherapy drugs are prescribed using Computerized Prescriber Order Entry (CPOE) or standardized Pre-printed Orders (PPO). The initiative was further enabled by changes to the provincial funding approach that flows facility funding for oral chemotherapy delivery. Methods: All 35 facilities prescribing chemotherapy in Ontario across 14 regions implemented strategies to work towards the common aim of reducing handwritten/verbal oral chemotherapy prescribing to zero by June 30th, 2015. Baseline audits were completed between Sept-Nov 2014; repeat audits were performed between Mar-May 2015. Each facility reported the number of patients that received an oral chemotherapy prescription, and the method of prescribing. Results: At baseline, 30% of audited prescriptions across the province were handwritten or verbal, which decreased to 9% by June 2015. Improvements were seen in thirteen of the 14 regions. Thirteen out of 35 facilities met the aim of 0 handwritten/verbal orders, with an additional 16 facilities seeing an improvement. Alignment with funding mechanisms, an early physician engagement strategy, and education of key stakeholders on CPOE systems were identified as key enablers to implementation. Conclusions: Though the goal of zero handwritten/verbal prescriptions was not met by all facilities, the initiative encouraged a change in implementing safe prescribing practices for oral chemotherapy. Further audits will assess that the gain was sustained and that the provincial goal is achieved. This initiative is part of a larger strategy to standardize care for systemic treatment patients and promote a culture of safety in hospitals. [Table: see text]

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.458
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.142 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicClinical practice guidelines implementation→French-language works237,207→