MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154657617 · doi:10.1089/can.2020.0144

Evolving Global Perspectives of Pharmacists: Dispensing Medical Cannabis

2021· review· en· W3154657617 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Holly B. Shulman, Vashti Sewpersaud, Celeste Thirlwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCannabis and Cannabinoid Research · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisMedical cannabisPharmacyPharmacistPerspective (graphical)Variety (cybernetics)MedicineFamily medicineMedical educationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Different countries have employed a variety of methods for their populace to access medical cannabis. Objectives: The purpose of this literature review was to assess the international literature on pharmacists' beliefs and attitudes towards medical cannabis. Methodology: This literature review summarized the various countries that utilize pharmacies and pharmacists to dispense medical cannabis. The countries included in this review were: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Serbia, Switzerland, USA, and Uruguay. Discussion: The pharmacist perspective has been of key importance within the medical landscape, as they are the ones who not only dispense medication but also counsel and monitor patients and it is this perspective that is lacking. Conclusion: Overall, this review found that even though pharmacists are generally comfortable with dispensing medical cannabis; they still require further education to do so as safely and effectively as possible.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.378 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207