MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156708154 · doi:10.3390/pharmacy9020080

Creating Standardized Tools for the Pharmacist-Led Assessment and Pharmacologic Management of Adult Canadians Wishing to Quit Smoking: A Consensus-Based Approach

2021· article· en· W3156708154 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kristi Butt, Nardine Nakhla

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsDocumentationSmoking cessationPharmacistMedicinePsychological interventionPharmacotherapyFamily medicineNursingPharmacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tobacco use continues to be recognized as the single most preventable cause of death worldwide. As the gatekeepers of and experts on pharmacotherapy, pharmacists play a vital role in facilitating smoking cessation. While existing frameworks have enabled pharmacists to provide smoking cessation services in Canada for many years, the way in which they are delivered vary considerably across the nation. The purpose of this initiative was to create standardized tools for the pharmacists providing cessation services to ensure all Canadians wishing to stop smoking have equal access to consistent, evidence-based care. An iterative process using repeated rounds of voting was employed to establish consensus among key opinion leaders on the most important items to include in tools for the pharmacist-led assessment and pharmacologic management of Canadian adults wishing to stop smoking. The results were used to create eight standardized documents for national use by pharmacists: a readiness to quit assessment tool, a patient consent form, a patient assessment form for past users of tobacco and/or tobacco-like products, a patient assessment form for current users of tobacco and/or tobacco-like products, a treatment algorithm, a treatment plan summary form, a prescribing documentation form, and a follow-up & monitoring documentation form. Although not described in detail in these documents, other strategies for smoking cessation (e.g., non-pharmacologic strategies (including quitting "cold turkey" and behavioural interventions), harm reduction strategies, etc.) should be considered when pharmacotherapy is inappropriate or undesired; care should be individualized based on a patient's previous experiences and current motivation. No single approach to treatment is endorsed by the authors. The consensus-based approach described here provides a suggested framework for harmonizing the pharmacist-led management of other ailments to optimize patient care.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacySame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207