MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238227307 · doi:10.1191/1078155205jp152oa

Antineoplastic agent workplace contamination study: the Alberta Cancer Board Pharmacy perspective

2005· article· en· W4238227307 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heidi Schulz, Susan Jane Bigelow, Roxanne Dobish, Carole Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacyAntineoplastic DrugsPerspective (graphical)CancerContaminationCancer drugsFamily medicineIntensive care medicinePharmacologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of routine monitoring for workplace antineoplastic agent contamination in the Alberta Cancer Board (ACB) pharmacy practice environment. SETTING: The ACB in the Canadian province of Alberta, which includes two public tertiary centres and 17 associated community satellite sites based around the province in existing hospitals. METHODS: Obtained organizational support and input prior to launching the feasibility study (Phase I). Samples were analysed for a common cytotoxic agent - cyclophosphamide. Surfaces chosen were within the biological safety cabinets, workplace counter tops and on external surfaces of vials provided by manufacturers. Blank samples and known contaminated controls were included in Phase I to reconfirm the methodology in a previously published study. Feasibility aspects of logistics and financial expenses were examined. A second phase (Phase II) was completed to test other areas of the pharmacy and vials, with blank samples included to reconfirm previously mentioned methodology. RESULTS: The results determined that the samples tested were below acceptable detection limits with the exception of the known contaminated sample (Phase I) and exterior surfaces of vials (Phase II). CONCLUSION: This project has increased staff awareness of the sources for antineoplastic agent workplace contamination. Some practice changes were instituted during the project itself. Logistics and expenses were realistic for routine monitoring to be adopted.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.428 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy PracticeSame topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207