‘Fitting in the pharmacist’ – a qualitative analysis of the perceived relationship between community pharmacists and older adults with complex care needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the current perceived relationship between older adults with varying levels of frailty and healthcare needs and community pharmacists. METHODS: This qualitative study conducted a thematic analysis of focus groups with older adults and older adult caregivers and community pharmacist participants. Participants were recruited following a maximum variation sampling technique. Verbatim transcripts were inductively coded using NVivo to develop key findings. KEY FINDINGS: Four major themes emerged: (i) Pharmacy Landscape, (ii) Prescription and Non-Prescription Drug Safety, (iii) Patient-Pharmacist Relationship and (iv) Recommendations for Pharmacy Practice. Themes demonstrate three key findings: (1) older adults approach drug information with a key focus on safety and cost of both prescription and non-prescription drugs, (2) there is a demonstrated opportunity, recognized by older adults and practitioners, for community pharmacists to expand their role in the care of older adults, (3) community pharmacists are able, interested and/or have already incorporated frailty assessments into their practice to better support their care of the older adult population with varying levels of frailty. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate a reason for the community pharmacist role to shift. The unique knowledge and skills of community pharmacists, coupled with their accessibility and strong patient-clinician relationship, have the potential to better support older adults with varying levels of frailty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".