MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307548945 · doi:10.3390/pharmacy10060139

Experience, Knowledge, and Perceptions of Pharmacogenomics among Pharmacists and Nurse Practitioners in Alberta Hospitals

2022· article· en· W4307548945 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacogenomicsFamily medicineMedicineDemographicsMedical prescriptionMEDLINEPharmacyHealth careNursingPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of clinical utility and the availability of prescription guidelines, pharmacogenomics (PGx) is not broadly used in institutional settings in Canada. To inform future implementation, this study aimed to identify healthcare provider knowledge, experience, and perceptions of PGx in Alberta, Canada. METHODS: An online 44-item survey was distributed to pharmacists, nurse practitioners, and physicians employed or contracted with Alberta Health Services from January to May 2022. Questions included: demographics, professional history, PGx education and exposure, knowledge, and ability to use PGx, and attitudes towards, feasibility, clinical utility, education, and implementation. RESULTS: Ninety-one pharmacists, 37 nurse practitioners, and 6 physicians completed the survey. Fifty-nine percent had 10 or more years of experience, and 71% practiced in urban settings. Only one-third had training in PGx, and one-quarter had used PGx. Most respondents (63%) had no knowledge of PGx resources, including the Pharmacogenomics Knowledge Base (75%), or the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines (85%). While participants agreed that they understood genetic (75%) and PGx (63%) concepts, most disagreed with their ability regarding practical applications of PGx such as translating genotype to phenotype (74%) or counselling patients on results (66%). Participants agreed on the clinical utility of PGx in preventing adverse drug reactions (80%) and enhancing medication efficacy (77%), and identified oncology (62%), cardiovascular/stroke (60%), and psychiatry (56%) as therapeutic areas to consider implementation. At present, healthcare provider knowledge (87%), cost (81%), and limited guidelines/evidence (70%) are seen as the greatest barriers to implementation. CONCLUSION: Alberta healthcare providers have limited training, experience, or knowledge in PGx. However, most appear to have a positive outlook regarding clinical utility, especially within oncology, cardiology, and psychiatry. More effort is required to socialize the availability and quality of evidence and guidelines for the interpretation of PGx test results, address other knowledge gaps, and improve financial limitations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.387 · 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