MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391146609 · doi:10.1177/23821205241226819

Medication Prescribing Errors on a Surgery Service – Addressing the Gap with a Curriculum for Surgery Residents: A Prospective Observational Study

2024· article· en· W4391146609 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Justine Ring, Jesse Maracle, Shannon Zhang, Michelle Methot, Boris Zevin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreUniversity of OttawaQueen's UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineCurriculumService (business)SurgeryGeneral surgeryMedical educationPsychologyInternal medicineBusinessPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES Educational interventions with proven effectiveness to reduce medication prescribing errors are currently lacking. Our objective was to implement and assess the effectiveness of a curriculum to reduce medication prescribing errors on a surgery service. METHODS This was a prospective observational cohort study at a Canadian academic hospital without an electronic order entry system. A pharmacist-led medication prescribing curriculum for surgery residents was developed and implemented over 2 days (2 h/day) in July 2019. Thirteen (76%) out of 17 surgery residents contributed pre-implementation data, while 13 (81%) out of 16 surgery residents contributed post-implementation data. Medication prescribing errors were tracked for 12 months pre-implementation and 6 months post-implementation. Errors were classified as prescription writing (PW) or decision making (DM). RESULTS There were a total of 1050 medication prescribing errors made in the pre-implementation period with 615 (59%) PW errors and 435 (41%) DM. There were a mean of 87.5 (SD = 14.6) total medication prescribing errors per month in the pre-implementation period with 51.3 (11.9) PW and 36.3 (6.0) DM errors. There were a total of 472 medication prescribing errors made in the post-implementation period with 260 (55%) PW and 212 (45%) DM errors. There were a mean of 78.7 (10.3) total medication prescribing errors per month in the post-implementation period with 43.3 (9.5) PW and 35.3 (4.2) DM errors. In the first quarter of the academic year, there were significantly fewer mean total errors per month post-implementation versus pre-implementation (77.7(12.7) versus 107.3(8.1); P = .035), with significantly fewer PW errors per month (40.7(13.2) versus 68.7(9.3); P = .046) and no difference in DM errors per month (37.0(2.0) versus 38.7(5.7); P = .671). There were no differences noted in the second quarter of the academic year. CONCLUSION Medication prescribing errors occurred from PW and DM. Medication prescribing curriculum decreased PW errors; however, a continued education program is warranted as the effect diminished over time.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular DevelopmentSame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207