MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991564192 · doi:10.1177/1715163519882466

Professional identity formation: The experience of regulated pharmacy technicians in Ontario

2019· article· en· W2991564192 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Paul Gregory, Zubin Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario College of Pharmacists
KeywordsPharmacyIdentity (music)Pharmacy technicianTypologyPharmacy practiceIdentity formationPsychologyMedicineNursingMedical educationSociologySocial psychologySelf-concept

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite being regulated and spoken about as professionals, there is little formal research examining professional identity formation among regulated pharmacy technicians. METHODS: A semistructured interview protocol was generated, based on Holden et al.'s typology of professional identity formation (PIF). Regulated pharmacy technicians in Ontario with a minimum of 2 years' experience working a minimum of 32 hours/week were recruited to participate. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analyzed based on professional identity formation. RESULTS: A total of 15 regulated pharmacy technicians from southern Ontario participated in this study. Regardless of demographic background, most participants demonstrated identity splinting as the dominant form of professional identity formation. Issues related to social valuing of the role of the technician and environmental opportunities to develop and grow were highlighted as significant barriers. INTERPRETATION: These findings suggest regulated pharmacy technicians have incomplete professional identities due in part to reasons linked to pharmacists and the pharmacy profession. The type of professional identity expressed by participants in this study may limit opportunities for full and optimal expression of their role. CONCLUSIONS: 2020;153:xx-xx.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du CanadaSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207