MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185599738 · doi:10.20506/rst.31.1.2113

Antimicrobial resistance and the guidelines of the International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products (VICH)

2012· review· en· W2185599738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hofmeier Marion

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIE · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthorizationMarketing authorizationProduct (mathematics)BusinessQuality (philosophy)Veterinary DrugsEuropean unionVeterinary medicineMedicineInternational tradeComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products (VICH) is an international tripartite cooperation programme that brings together regulatory authorities and industry representatives from the European Union, Japan and the United States, with Australia, New Zealand and Canada as observers. VICH aims to improve international coordination and cooperation to achieve greater harmonisation of the requirements for veterinary product registration in the regions concerned. VICH develops harmonised data requirements, i.e., standards for the scientific studies on quality, safety and efficacy that are required to obtain a marketing authorisation for a veterinary medicinal product. It does this by publishing guidelines that provide uniform and consistent guidance for sponsors to follow in developing data for application dossiers as well as for post-marketing safety monitoring of veterinary medicinal products. Of the 49 VICH guidelines that have been developed so far, two guidelines in particular address issues related to antimicrobial resistance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.465
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.015 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Scientifique et Technique de l OIESame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207