2014 CSHP National Awards Program Winners Programme national des prix 2014 de la SCPH : lauréats et lauréates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Personal smartphones are used frequently by healthcare practitioners in hospitals to assist in the provision of care.The Vancouver Island Health Authority (VIHA) is one of the first health authorities in Canada to endorse the iPhone® smartphone as a potentially valuable tool for clinical practice.We collaborated with the University of British Columbia (UBC) Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences to design and conduct our research.To the best of our knowledge this is the first study of its kind in North America.Objective: To measure smartphones effect on pharmacists' efficiency, to assess pharmacist acceptance of corporate smartphones, and to investigate how these devices are being utilized.Methods: This multi-center time-trial, survey, and observational prospective study enrolled 90 pharmacists across eight hospitals on Vancouver Island.Participants performed a time-trial of 22 situational drug information questions before and after receiving an iPhone.They also completed both demographic and satisfaction surveys.A subset of 14 of the 90 pharmacists participated in a pre and post iPhone implementation eight hour direct observation study.Lastly, communication data from the phone service provider was collected and analyzed.Results: Smartphone use facilitated a statistically significant faster median response time over all the situational time-trial questions combined by approximately six minutes (2895 seconds pre-iPhone vs. 2538 seconds post-iPhone) (p=0.039).Almost half of pharmacists reported that the smartphone increased their confidence and competence to resolve drug therapy problems.Smartphone use did not significantly influence time spent walking to obtain a resource, use of computers, or in the answering of clinical questions in observation.Conclusion: Pharmacists readily accepted smartphones into their practice.Despite the lack of impact on direct observation measures of workflow, smartphones improved pharmacists' efficiency in the answering of hypothetical questions.This research provides sufficient evidence to continue to support the use of smartphones within VIHA's pharmacy department.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.163 | 0.034 |
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".