MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045428547 · doi:10.1186/s40545-020-00252-0

Mental health issues impacting pharmacists during COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3045428547 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Elbeddini, Cindy Wen, Yasamin Tayefehchamani, Anthony To

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPandemicPharmacistHealth carePharmacyMedicineTriageNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Family medicineMedical emergencyPsychiatryDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) impact on the mental health of healthcare workers is extremely detrimental. It is imperative that the psychological health of all healthcare workers be protected. However, an often overlooked member of the healthcare frontline is the pharmacist. Pharmacists provide many types of essential services during the pandemic, which often cannot be done from a remote location. Being frontline healthcare workers, pharmacists have experienced an increase in the number of patients seen, the amount of screening and triage being done, the amount of COVID-19 information being delivered, the number of medication shortages, and the amount of workplace harassment taking place. These activities increase the amount of stress, burden, and frustration felt by pharmacists have a negative impact on their mental health and well-being. This article seeks to address the specific implications of COVID-19 on the mental health of pharmacists.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.308
GPT teacher head0.625
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations92
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Policy and PracticeSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207