Enabling pharmacist prescribing: Lessons learned in Nova Scotia using behaviour change theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic alongside increased patient demand, enablement of scope, and government funding has accelerated the need and demand for pharmacist prescribing in Nova Scotia. Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study was undertaken to understand barriers and facilitators to pharmacist prescribing in Nova Scotia, Canada. This consisted of: 1) a cross-sectional survey and 2) semistructured, qualitative interviews with pharmacists practising in the community. The survey and interviews were designed using the Behaviour Change Wheel that encompasses the Capability Opportunity Motivation Model of Behaviour Change (COM-B) and Theoretical Domains Framework version 2 (TDFv2). Results: Of 190 survey respondents, the percentage who prescribed 15+ times/month increased from 49% before to 80% during the COVID-19 pandemic (P<0.001). Pharmacists identified knowledge, social norms/pressures, and rewards or consequences related to how and when to prescribe as facilitators (Knowledge, Social Influences, and Motivation TDFv2 domains, respectively). Barriers included the environmental context and fear of negative outcomes (Environmental Context and Resources and Beliefs about Consequences, respectively). Through the interviews, the presence of prescribing decision tools (Memory, Attention and Decision Processes) and a supportive organizational culture (Environmental Context and Resources) were facilitators. Worry was expressed about making mistakes (Beliefs about Consequences) and feeling significant pressure to meet patient demand (Social Influences) in a busy setting (Environmental Context and Resources). Discussion: Supports to better enable pharmacist prescribing are described, with key messages for pharmacists, pharmacy owners/managers, educators, advocacy bodies, regulators, and government identified. Conclusion: Pharmacist prescribing has increased significantly over a short period of time. Environmental supports (e.g., time, space, access to patient records), government funding, peer support, and public awareness are needed to optimize and fully implement these practice changes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".