MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087645119 · doi:10.1097/hnp.0b013e31823bff70

Herbal Remedies, Mood, and Cognition

2012· article· en· W2087645119 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHolistic Nursing Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedicinal Plant Extracts Effects
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association for the Study of Adult Education
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodCognitionPsychologyMedicinePsychotherapistClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herbal medicines were the "sole" source of medicine for thousands of years, in every culture since the advent of human civilization. Today, patients are increasing the use of these botanicals for numerous conditions, such as mood and cognition. This article will explore commonly used herbal remedies for mood and cognition functioning. It is imperative that nurses and nurse practitioners obtain expertise with these botanicals with regard to efficacy, adverse effects and contraindications, possible drug interactions, and safety considerations.

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.

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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.916

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.321 · 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