MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409053310

Rauwolfia in the Treatment of Hypertension.

2015· article· en· W2409053310 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas Lobay

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacology and Obesity Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Blood pressureAdverse effectDosingClinical pharmacologyAlternative medicineIntensive care medicinePharmacologyTraditional medicineInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rauwolfia serpentina is a safe and effective treatment for hypertension. The plant was used by many physicians throughout India in the 1940s and then was used throughout the world in the 1950s, including in the United States and Canada. It fell out of popularity when adverse side effects, including depression and cancer, became associated with it. This author reviews the scientific literature with regard to the use of Rauwolfia and the treatment of hypertension. The author reviews the plant's botany, chemistry, and pharmacology and provides a researched and documented method of action for the active ingredients. With special emphasis on the plant's role in treating high blood pressure, the author looks at medical uses of the plant, critically examining its adverse side effects, toxicology, and carcinogenicity. The author refutes the association between the plant and carcinogenicity and discusses the importance of correct dosing and of screening patients to minimize the occurrence of depression. He concludes with the recommendation of use of low dose Rauwolfia (LDR) for suitable patients with hypertension. The plant provides clinicians with a safe and effective adjunct to pharmaceuticals in the treatment of high blood pressure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations104
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPharmacology and Obesity TreatmentFrench-language works237,207