MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410036021 · doi:10.1111/bcpt.70050

Billing Deprescribing Interventions: Portrait of an Initiative in Québec, Canada

2025· article· en· W4410036021 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexandre Campeau Calfat, Maude Gosselin, Caroline Sirois

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeprescribingPsychological interventionMedicinePolypharmacyPharmacyFormularyHealth careFamily medicineNursingIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing is a patient-centred process in which a healthcare professional reduces or stops medications to improve health outcomes. Since late 2022, community pharmacists in Québec, Canada, have been able to bill for deprescribing interventions, enabling more robust deprescribing research in large cohort studies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the prevalence of deprescribing claims in Québec community pharmacies from January 1, 2023, to November 30, 2024, and to identify the most commonly deprescribed medication classes. METHODS: We analysed the total number of deprescribing claims submitted by pharmacists during this period and categorized deprescribed medications using the American Hospital Formulary Service classification. FINDINGS: Over 90 000 claims were submitted for deprescribing interventions, with most involving central nervous system medications. Although the number of claims increased over time, the overall volume remained modest. CONCLUSION: While limitations remain, such as the gradual adoption of billing interventions, Québec's reimbursement model for deprescribing interventions provides an important framework for research, offering a mechanism to study deprescribing in real-world settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBasic & Clinical Pharmacology & ToxicologySame topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesFrench-language works237,207