MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065679289

Exploring Factors Associated with Prescribers’ Comfort Levels in Analgesic Prescribing in Quebec

2024· article· en· W7065679289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical prescriptionLogistic regressionHealth professionalsAnalgesicCross-sectional studyHealth careContinuing education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Usra Naeem,1,2 Gwenaelle De Clifford-Faugère,1 Marimée Godbout-Parent,1 Hermine Lore Nguena Nguefack,1 Anaïs Lacasse1 1Département des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec, Canada; 2Department of Health Professional Technologies, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, University of Lahore, Lahore, PakistanCorrespondence: Anaïs Lacasse, Département des sciences de la santé, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue, 445, boul. de l’Université, Rouyn-Noranda, Qc, J9X 5E4, Canada, Tel +819 762-0971,2722, Email lacassea@uqat.caPurpose: Identifying the factors associated with comfort level when prescribing medications is important for tailoring education and training. This study aimed to explore factors associated with the comfort level of healthcare professionals regarding dispensing and adjusting prescriptions for the treatment of chronic pain (CP).Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among licensed physicians, pharmacists, and nurse practitioners across the province of Quebec, Canada. Comfort level regarding dispensing and/or adjusting prescriptions for CP treatment was measured on a 0– 10 rating scale (0 = very uncomfortable, 10 = very comfortable).Results: In total, 207 prescribers participated in this study (83 physicians, 58 pharmacists, and 66 nurse practitioners). 56.5% reported a comfort level in dispensing and/or adjusting prescriptions for the treatment of CP < 6/10. The median comfort level score was 6 (interquartile range - IQR: 2). Differences in median scores were found between physicians (6), pharmacists (7) and nurses (5; p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression revealed that the factors associated with an increased likelihood of reporting a high comfort level (≥ 6/10) were: being a pharmacist, having a relative living with CP, a greater percentage of past year continuing educational activities about CP management, and higher perception of short-acting opioids risks. Factors associated with lower comfort levels were as follows: being a nurse practitioner, having fewer years of experience, living in a remote region, living with CP, and a higher perception of long-acting opioids risks. The practice setting and sex at birth were also associated with comfort level.Conclusion: The comfort level regarding prescribing for CP varies according to socioeconomic/professional factors, which can lead to disparities in the quality of care and outcomes for patients. Our results reinforce the importance of investing in initial training and continuing education of prescribers.Keywords: medications, pharmacological treatment, healthcare professionals, physician, pharmacist, nurse, factors, sex

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.398
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.093 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207