MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378952203 · doi:10.1177/10781552231179190

Implementation and evaluation of a shared care model between oncologists and pharmacists for breast cancer patients at a Canadian regional ambulatory cancer centre

2023· article· en· W4378952203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E H Goh, Sylvie Labelle, Angela Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacistAmbulatoryFamily medicineBreast cancerMedical prescriptionCancerPharmaceutical careAmbulatory carePharmacyInternal medicineHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The introduction of CDK 4/6 inhibitors for breast cancer patients has contributed to increased ambulatory patient visits for oncologists. The Medication Assessment by Pharmacist program aims to evaluate the impact of oncology pharmacists performing medication assessment follow-up visits. METHODS: Breast cancer patients on a CDK 4/6 inhibitor deemed suitable by their oncologist for pharmacist assessment could be booked for a pharmacist medication assessment appointment at alternate treatment cycles. RESULTS: Between February 2019 to November 2021, 29 of 128 patients (22.7%) were selected for 46 total Medication Assessment by Pharmacist visits resulting in 920 min of clinic time savings for physicians. There were similar rates of adhering to provincial protocols for scheduling visits (99% vs. 96%, p = 0.12) and monitoring investigations (98% vs. 98%, p = 0.96) between those enrolled in Medication Assessment by Pharmacist or not. Surveys completed by medical oncologists and pharmacists demonstrated that nine of nine oncologists felt Medication Assessment by Pharmacist reduced workload and wanted Medication Assessment by Pharmacist expanded to additional oncology drugs. Pharmacist-completed surveys revealed that nine of nine pharmacists felt Medication Assessment by Pharmacist increased job satisfaction, and allowed further application of clinical skills. All agreed that patients were receptive to meeting with pharmacists. According to survey results, 33% of oncologists versus 100% of pharmacists routinely asked about medication adherence, new medications or supplements. CONCLUSION: Integrating pharmacists into a shared care model reduces ambulatory patient visits for oncologists without deviating from provincial protocol guidelines for monitoring and visits for patients on CDK 4/6 inhibitors. Leveraging the medication expertise of pharmacists also increases the frequency of addressing medication adherence and concurrent therapies. Medication Assessment by Pharmacist may be an effective strategy in alleviating projected shortages of oncology providers.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy PracticeSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207