Survey of Australian and Canadian Community Pharmacists’ Experiences With Patients at Risk of Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study's objective was to examine Canadian and Australian community pharmacists' experiences with people at risk of suicide. METHODS: A survey was developed and administered online. Countries were compared by Fisher's exact and t tests. Multivariable logistic-regression analysis was used to identify variables associated with preparedness to help someone in a suicidal crisis. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 235 Canadian and 161 Australian pharmacists. Most (85%) interacted with someone at risk of suicide at least once, and 66% experienced voluntary patient disclosure of suicidal thoughts. More Australians than Canadians had mental health crisis training (p<0.001). Preparedness to help in a suicidal crisis was negatively associated with being Canadian, having a patient who died by suicide, lacking training and confidence, and permissive attitudes toward suicide. CONCLUSIONS: Several perceived barriers impede pharmacists' abilities to help patients who voluntarily disclose suicidal thoughts. Gatekeeper and related suicide prevention strategy training for community pharmacists is warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".