Herbs or Natural Products That Decrease Cancer Growth: Part One of a Four-Part Series
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based research information about 31 herbs and natural products that have shown potential in early research to decrease cancer growth or as adjuncts with cancer treatment. DATA SOURCES: Names of herbs and natural products with potential to decrease cancer growth have been selected from listings in the Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database and Lawrence Review of Natural Products-Monograph System. Information about these herbs has been found in evidence-based studies cited in references. DATA SYNTHESIS: In preliminary studies, 31 herbs and natural products appear to have potential for cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary evidence may be useful to healthcare professionals and patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The information in this article is designed to provide quick access for healthcare professionals working in clinical oncology. Oncology nurses who have this information can become resources for patients and other healthcare professionals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it