Protocol for the Optimizing Naloxone Dispensing in Pharmacies (ONDP) Online Continuing Education Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of opioid-related deaths in Canada has steadily increased since 2016 and the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened this trend. Naloxone has been pivotal for reducing opioid-related harms and death, and pharmacists play a crucial role in ensuring the supply of naloxone to Canadians through community pharmacies. However, naloxone dispensing by pharmacists is not optimal; in fact, in Ontario, only 50% of pharmacists offer naloxone, despite national guidelines that pharmacists should offer naloxone to everyone with an opioid prescription. When asked why pharmacists do not proactively offer naloxone, recent research has identified that pharmacists need continuing education to boost confidence and knowledge on how to start conversations with patients. The study involves a delayed start, double-blind randomized controlled trial, for Canadian licensed pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. The goals of the program are to increase Canadian pharmacy professional's knowledge, confidence, and motivation to proactively offer naloxone, as well as to decrease stigma associated with naloxone. The program incorporates behaviour change techniques from the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. The intervention program includes three modules that focus on improving pharmacists' communication skills by teaching them how to proactively offer naloxone, while the control group will complete a reading assignment on the naloxone consensus guidelines. The program will involve a process and outcome evaluation in addition to a contribution analysis. This program is important for breaking down previously identified barriers and knowledge gaps for why pharmacists currently do not proactively offer naloxone. This study will provide important new information about what behaviour change techniques are successful in improving confidence and motivation in the pharmacy profession and in an online environment. Findings from this study can be used to produce a national naloxone education program that can also be implemented into current pharmacy school curriculum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.101 | 0.012 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".