Pharmacotherapy in Endocrinology: Diabetes, Obesity, and Hyper¬lipidemia- Review Article
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of endocrine pharmacology is very wide but most of studies in the recent years from the world and Iran have focused on diabetes, osteoporosis, and lipid disorders. In the present review, we tried to evaluate the improvements and publications in that field briefly. Interestingly, many of studies have focused on agents that have traditional and natural origin. Although few basic studies have gone on the direct line to complete preclinical and some clinical trial studies, there are many non-clinical studies that have proved efficacy of many compounds in endocrine diseases but these studies were not continued at clinical stages to reach a drug. However, it is appreciable that, some researchers have given novel ideas that deserve investment by grant bodies to reach out valuable works. We believe that science of endocrine pharmacology is still young and more quality studies are still needed to introduce effective medications for diseases like diabetes and osteoporosis or even obesity and lipid disorders. Keywords: Pharmacotherapy, Diabetes, Osteoporosis, Lipid disorders, Emerging therapies
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".