Bibliographic record
Abstract
No doubt you have seen the recent report from the Ontario College of Pharmacists (OCP), "Under stress and duress: The prevalence and impact of corporate influence on pharmacy professional autonomy and wellbeing: An analysis of OCP registrant survey and town hall responses." 1 It doesn't paint a pretty picture of modern pharmacy practice.Briefly, the OCP surveyed registrants in the spring of 2024, receiving about 4300 responses, and held 4 town hall meetings, which had 1300 participants.Notable findings were as follows:• Seventy percent are currently experiencing workplace pressures (defined as direction or pressure to complete an activity in a limited time frame or to a certain target number or dollar amount).• Working at Loblaw/Drugstore Pharmacy, Rexall, Walmart and Shoppers Drug Mart was identified as the worst for these pressures (in the range of 82% to 93% of those working at these pharmacies).• Pharmacists working in hospitals/health care facilities and independent pharmacies experienced the lowest levels of workplace pressure (in the range of 18% to 20%).• Further qualitative analysis identified areas of concern:Workplace pressures are pervasive at corporate-owned pharmacies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.034 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".