A Nationwide Survey on Medication Follow-up Care by Community Pharmacists: From The Japanese Nationwide Pharmacy Collaboration Survey in 2023
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Japan, the Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Act was amended in December 2019, and now requires pharmacists to follow-up on patients during treatment. Although there have been some studies on the effectiveness of follow-ups by pharmacists, there are no reports on the status of implementation in clinical practice. We conducted a nationwide survey on follow-up care to investigate the actual situation. We randomly selected 10% of community pharmacies in each prefecture and conducted a survey. We built a web-based system for the collection of basic information on the pharmacies and follow-up cases. A total of 561 pharmacies were pre-entered. Of these, 110 pharmacies (19.6%) reported 326 follow-up cases. Information was provided to doctors in 129 cases (39.6%), of which prescription proposals were made in 10 (7.8%) instances. The follow-up implementation rate based on the number of prescriptions dispensed was estimated to be 0.84% (95% confidence interval: 0.76-0.94%). This study revealed the status of follow-ups in clinical practice. Pharmacists can contribute to the optimization of drug treatment by providing follow-up information to doctors and making prescription proposals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it