Nurse practitioner prescribing: an international perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jacqueline Fong,1,2 Thomas Buckley,2 Andrew Cashin3 1St George Hospital, Kogarah, 2Sydney Nursing School, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia; 3School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia Background: Internationally, the delivery of care provided by nurses and midwives has undergone a significant change due to a variety of interrelated factors, including economic circumstances, a diminishing number of medical providers, the unavailability of adequate health care services in underserved and rural areas, and growing specialization among the professions. One solution to the challenges of care delivery has been the introduction of nurse practitioners (NPs) and the authorization of NPs to prescribe medicines. Aim: The aim of this paper was to review the current international literature related to NP prescribing and compare the findings to the Australian context. The review focuses on literature from the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Methods: Databases were searched from January 2000 to January 2015. The following keywords: “nurse practitioner”, “advanced nurse”, “advanced practice nurse”, “prescri*”, “Australia”, “United States America”, “UK”, “New Zealand”, “Canada”, “Europe”, “drug prescri*”, “prescri* authority”, and “prescri* legislation” were used. Findings: NPs tend to prescribe in differing contexts of practice to provide care in underserved populations and require good systems literacy to practice across complex systems. The key themes identified internationally related to NP prescribing relate to barriers to prescribing, confidence in prescribing, and the unique role of NPs in prescribing medicines, eg, the high prevalence of prescribing pain medicines in several countries, including Australia. Conclusion: Across all countries reviewed, there appears a need for further research into the organizational and financial conditions/climate in which NPs prescribe. Such research may give a better understanding of not only NP's true prescribing capacity currently but also inform future NP prescribing policy. Keywords: nurse practitioner, prescribing
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 | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".