MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796860482 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v10n5p88

Separating Prescription From Dispensation Medicines: Economic Effect Estimation in Japan

2018· article· en· W2796860482 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masayuki Yokoi, Takao Tashiro

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical prescriptionMedicinePharmacySeparation (statistics)VariablesRegression analysisFamily medicineActuarial scienceBusinessMedical emergencyStatisticsPharmacologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the effects of the separation between dispensing and prescribing medicines by pharmacists in pharmacies and doctors in medical institutions, respectively (separation system). The methodology avails public national data. The participation of Japanese medical institutions to the separation system was optional according to the legal system. Consequently, its spreading rate for each administrative district is highly variable, allowing us to study its correlation with various medication costs and other factors, such as the generic medicine replacement ratio, proportion of elderly, and number of doctors per 100 000 individuals as independent variables. These four factors are known to be influential in medical compensation. We used regression analysis by the weighted least square method, with dependent variables being costs of daily medicines, specifically, total, internal, one-shot, external, and injection medicines; medical devices, brand-name medicines, generic medicines, and number of prescribed medicines; as well as technical fees. The analysis focused on whether the extent of the separation system reduces costs such as those for medicines, medical devices, technical fees, or number of prescribed medicines. The partial regression coefficient of the spreading rate of the separation system was found to have negative relationships with all daily costs and number of prescribed medicines, as well as the technical fee, except for external medicines, for which most of the market is represented by light analgesics (taken by patients as needed). The necessity of separating prescribing and dispensing is thus low because of the low information asymmetry between doctors and patients. The results revealed that promoting the separation system reduced medication costs, because it normalized the medication market for daily necessities by compensating information asymmetry. Furthermore, the separation system reduced excesses in prescribing medicines.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207