CSHP Summer Educational Sessions (SES) 2015: Poster Abstracts / Séances éducatives d’été (SÉÉ) 2015 de la SCPH : Résumés des affiches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Facilitated Poster Sessions: Discussion of Original Research and Pharmacy Practice Projects Séance animée de présentations par affiches : Discussions sur des projets de recherche originale et des projets dans le domaine de la pratique pharmaceutique Safety 1. Evaluation and Validation of Pictograms about how to Make Medications Taste Better 2. Variation in Antiretroviral Concentrations during Acute Hepatitis C: A Case Report 3. Evaluating Recall of Key Safety Messages, Attitudes and Perceptions of Patient Safety Initiative 4. Persistence and Compliance with Cardiovascular Drug Therapy among Seniors 5. Preventable Medication Incidents: Look-Alike/Sound-Alike Drug Names Pharmacy Practice 1. Revising the GRASP® Workload Measurement Tool to Track Clinical Pharmacy Key Performance Indicators 2. The Development of an Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience in Pharmacy Informatics 3. Evaluation of an Educational Intervention for Pharmacist Documentation Practices in a Tertiary Care Hospital 4. Critical Care Pharmacist Pilot Project 5. Developing and Implementing a Vision for Clinical Communication Using Pharmacy Information Systems in Hospitals 6. Pre-operative Study Evaluating Patient Complexity with a Novel Pharmacy Triage Tool
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.445 | 0.103 |
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".