MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162925667 · doi:10.1517/13543776.13.7.979

Epilepsy drug review: patent activity from 1999 to 2002

2003· article· en· W2162925667 on OpenAlexaff
Mark R. Bowlby, Wayne E. Childers

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyDrugAnticonvulsantAnticonvulsant drugsMedicineAction (physics)PharmacologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article summarises the patent activity in the anticonvulsant field for the period 1999 – 2002. Since numerous patents include treatment of epilepsy among their utility claims without direct supporting evidence, the authors have limited the discussion to applications which present efficacy data in one or more animal seizure models or to mechanisms of action for which there is ample literature evidence to support the claims. The various patents are grouped into common mechanistic themes, with additional sections provided for agents which resemble or are derived from known marketed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and for agents which act via unknown mechanisms. A summary of patenting trends and a discussion of the overall impact of patenting activity for this period are provided.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.255 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Therapeutic PatentsSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207