MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994927246 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v72i6.2944

Recall of Pharmaceutical Pictograms by Older Adults

2019· article· en· W2994927246 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Régis Vaillancourt, Cindy N Giby, Bradley P Murphy, Annie Pouliot, Anne Trinneer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSafety Warnings and Signage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPictogramRecallPharmacyMeaning (existential)MedicineHealth literacyPopulationLiteracyComprehensionFamily medicinePsychologyHealth careLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACTBackground: Low health literacy and high medication burden in the older adult population are contributing factors to the misunderstanding of medication instructions, leading to an increased risk of poor adherence and adverse events in this group of patients. Objective: To evaluate the ability of older adults to recall the meaning of 13 pharmaceutical pictograms 4 weeks after receipt of feedback on pictogram meaning.Methods: Older adults (aged 65 or older) were recruited from one community pharmacy in Canada. One-on-one structured interviews were conducted to assess the comprehensibility of 13 pharmaceutical pictograms from the International Pharmaceutical Federation’s database of pictograms. Each participant was then told the meaning of each pictogram. Recall was assessed 4 weeks later. Results: A total of 58 participants met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate. The number of pictograms meeting the ISO threshold for comprehensibility of symbols increased from 10 at the initial comprehensibility assessment to 13 at the recall assessment. Analysis of demographic data showed no associations between initial comprehensibility of the pictograms and age, sex, education level, or number of medications taken.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that after being informed of the meaning of pharmaceutical pictograms, older adults were able to recall the pictogram meanings for at least 4 weeks.RÉSUMÉContexte : Les faibles connaissances en matière de santé des personnes âgées et le lourd fardeau des médicaments qui pèse sur elles sont des facteurs qui contribuent à l’incompréhension des instructions relatives à l’administration des médicaments, ce qui entraîne un risque plus élevé de mauvaise adhésion au traitement et d’événements indésirables dans ce groupe de patients. Objectif : Évaluer la capacité des adultes plus âgés à se souvenir du sens des 13 pictogrammes pharmaceutiques, quatre semaines après avoir été informés de leur sens.Méthodes : Les adultes plus âgés (65 ans et au-delà) ont été recrutés dans une pharmacie communautaire du Canada. Des entrevues structurées en tête-à-tête ont été menées pour évaluer l’intelligibilité de 13 pictogrammes pharmaceutiques extraits de la base de données de la Fédération internationale pharmaceutique. Le sens de chaque pictogramme a ensuite été communiqué à chaque participant et, quatre semaines plus tard, leur capacité à s’en souvenir a été évaluée.Résultats : Cinquante-huit participants répondaient au critère d’inclusion et ont accepté de participer à l’étude. Le nombre de pictogrammes répondant au seuil ISO d’intelligibilité des symboles est passé de 10 (au moment de l’évaluation d’intelligibilité initiale) à 13 (au moment de l’évaluation du rappel). L’analyse des données démographiques n’a indiqué aucune association entre l’intelligibilité initiale des pictogrammes et l’âge, le sexe, le niveau de formation ou le nombre de médicaments que prenaient ces personnes.Conclusions : Les résultats de cette étude indiquent qu’après avoir été informés du sens des pictogrammes pharmaceutiques, les aînés étaient en mesure de s’en souvenir pendant au moins quatre semaines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicSafety Warnings and SignageFrench-language works237,207