MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545371828

Use of Paragraph 6 System for Access to Medicine

2010· article· en· W1545371828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParagraphIntellectual propertyTRIPS architectureTRIPS AgreementFlexibility (engineering)BusinessLaw and economicsPolitical scienceLawEngineeringEconomicsTransport engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intellectual property protection regime under the TRIPS Agreement raises certain public health concerns regarding access to medicine. However, the TRIPS Agreement includes various flexibilities which may be utilized by its member nations to ameliorate its negative impact on access to medicine. One such flexibility is the Paragraph 6 System. This paper highlights some of the difficulties involved in using the Paragraph 6 System as determined by its first and only use in the trade of Apo-TriAvir® from Canada to Rwanda, and proposes potential revisions that may be made to the Paragraph 6 System or other future legislations implementing the Paragraph 6 System at a national level in order to render the System more effective for use, as well as attempts to provide a realistic view of the impact of intellectual property protection on access to medicine.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207