MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400188616 · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2024.06.012

Development and validation of measures of pharmacists’ acceptability and willingness to screen for perinatal depression

2024· article· en· W4400188616 on OpenAlexaff
Sarira El‐Den, Katharine Birkness, Lily Pham, Andrea Murphy, Rebekah Moles, Claire L. O’Reilly, Camille Raynes‐Greenow, Timothy F. Chen, Corina Raduescu, David M. Gardner, Stephen Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory factor analysisPsychologyMultivariate statisticsMental healthClinical psychologyWillingness to payPharmacyMultivariate analysisFamily medicineMedicinePsychiatryPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While pharmacists' roles in mental healthcare are expanding, research exploring pharmacists' acceptability and willingness to provide mental health services is limited. This study developed and validated theory-driven measures of pharmacists' acceptability and willingness to screen for perinatal depression in community pharmacy settings. MATERIALS/METHODS: Items were developed using published literature and the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA), then content validated using consensus methods with experts who completed the content validity index (CVI). The revised items were disseminated to pharmacists in Australia. Responses were analysed descriptively. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) were used to explore the factorial structure and generate scales. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to explore predictors of willingness. RESULTS: A 58-item questionnaire was developed, encompassing the 7 domains of the TFA and an eighth domain (willingness). The average CVI was 0.92, domain range (0.88-0.96). The universal CVI was 56/58. Expert feedback informed item revision, creation and deletion. Pharmacists' responses (n = 157) to the final 42-item questionnaire indicated overall acceptance and willingness to conduct PND screening. However, perceived knowledge was lacking. The EFA resulted a two-factor solution (1 = acceptance; 2 = self-efficacy). The measurement scales created had good internal consistency. In multivariate regression analysis, 'Acceptance' (Beta = 0.949 (0.760-1.103)) and 'Self-Efficacy' (Beta = 0.107 (0.036-0.174)) were significant predictors of 'Willingness' and the model predicted 77 % of the variation in 'Willingness'. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometrically-sound measures of pharmacists' acceptability and willingness to screen for PND have been developed with stakeholder input. The questionnaire can be used for standardised measurement of these constructs across studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.381
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Social and Administrative PharmacySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207