MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204137737 · doi:10.1016/j.japh.2021.09.016

The role of pharmacy technicians in vaccination services: a scoping review

2021· review· en· W3204137737 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew DeMarco, Caitlin Carter, Sherilyn K. D. Houle, Nancy M. Waite

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Pharmacists Association · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntramuscular injections and effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacyPharmacy technicianCINAHLPharmacistFamily medicineWorkloadTechnicianInclusion (mineral)MEDLINEVaccinationClinical pharmacyNursingPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A busy pharmacy workload may limit a pharmacist's ability to meet the needs of vaccine-willing patients and also contribute to missed opportunities to engage with vaccine hesitant individuals. Opportunities for pharmacy technicians to support vaccination services may play a role in addressing increasing patient vaccination needs. PURPOSE: This research aims to review the role of pharmacy technicians in vaccination services that is supported by pharmacy practice research to date. METHODS: In compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocols, systematic searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Scopus, and CINAHL. Articles published through June 2020, in French, English, and Spanish, were screened for eligibility. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts for inclusion. Data extraction of included study methodologies and results was performed by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. RESULTS: A total of 656 records were identified through the search of published literature. Full-text screening of 145 records identified 14 articles for inclusion. Most articles evaluated emerging pharmacy technician roles in patient screening (n = 8, 53%) and vaccine administration (n = 5, 36%). Implementation of both emerging roles demonstrated positive patient outcomes (n = 10, 72%). Screening activities were complicated by the complexity of the role, as well as its potential to increase overall time spent on vaccination services. Pharmacists and technicians advocated for accredited vaccine administration training owing to consistent benefits in pharmacy workflow efficiency, pharmacist clinical time, and pharmacy technician job satisfaction. CONCLUSION: This review supports the effective deployment of pharmacy technicians in delivering vaccination services. Despite pharmacy technician vaccine administration roles being highly regulated, professional advocacy by pharmacists and technicians can use the advantageous training, workflow, and patient outcomes benefits presented in this review. Early adopters of professional practice advancements for pharmacy technician vaccine administration may expand vaccination service capacity efficiently and safely, thereby reaching more patients.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Pharmacists AssociationSame topicIntramuscular injections and effectsFrench-language works237,207