MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997101431 · doi:10.1684/jpc.2019.0426

Normes de préparation de produits stériles en pharmacie au Québec

2019· article· fr· W2997101431 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maude Gobeil, Hélène Boyer, Josée Robillard, François E. Lalonde, Denis Pelletier, Mélanie Richer, Xavier Lessard, Jean‐Marc Forest

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The production of sterile preparations requires a strict regulatory framework in order to standardize and optimize aseptic techniques. In spring 2014, the Ordre des pharmaciens du Québec has reviewed its existing guidelines and published two new standards for sterile preparations. Several recommendations and modifications have been added to the existing 1995 standard to provide greater public protection, including the use of the required protective garb, strict aseptic procedures and determination of the Beyond-Use Date of the preparations. Two independent standards are now available for pharmacists who supervise the production of sterile preparations in Quebec. One concerns non-hazardous sterile preparations (standard 2014.01) and the other concern hazardous sterile preparations (standard 2014.02). Pharmacist involved in this type of practice must be familiar with the various aspects of these standards in order to maintain the quality and to minimize microbial and chemical contamination. It is also important to ensure the safety of the assigned personnel to the compounding of hazardous sterile preparations which must fully respect the requirements to avoid significant risks.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207