MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480138702

중증급성호흡기증후군(SARS)의 한약 치료에 관련된 WHO 임상논문 보고에 대한 개관

2005· article· ko· W2480138702 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
장인수, 형례창, 한창호

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internal Korean Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTraditional medicineOutbreakChinaConvalescenceSevere acute respiratory syndromeTraditional Chinese medicineEtiologyAlternative medicineSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirusFamily medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)VirologyPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

【Objective: In the winter of 2002, severe acute respiratory syndrome(SARS) began to spread throughout the world. More than 5,000 cases were reported in China, including over 1,700 cases in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region(Hong Kong SAR). The total number of cases reported from Canada and Singapore was more than 200. The total number of SARS cases world-wide reached 8,437 with incidences in 29 counties. Mortality from SARS is estimated at $10{\sim}12%$ . When the SARS outbreak occurred in China, the State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of China immediately initiated clinical research projects on the use of integrated herbal medicine and Western medicine for treating SARS. and, in Hong Kong SAR, research on the use of herbal medicine for the prevention and treatment of SARS. Reports were released during convalescence. The objective of this study is to overview twelve clinical SARS reports of WHO on the treatment of SARS with herbal medicine and evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment of SARS with herbal medicine, and further to share experiences and knowledge of the treatment of SARS. Methods: Twelve clinical reports about SARS from the WHO were selected, overviewed and evaluated for efficacy and safety of treatments of SARS. Results and Conclusion: Twelve clinical reports about SARS showed that the integrated treatment may have advantages, and the advantages are reflected in the following findings: Firstly, herbal medicine is not targeted only at a specific etiology or a certain pathological link, but also at the pathological status of the patients at that particular time. Therefore, comprehensive readjustment was made through various angles, targets and channels to restore the balance of the body. Secondly, there are advantages in the differentiation of the disease and the treatment. Based on the various symptoms, herbal medicine enables the physician to adopt the most suitable principle, provide individual treatment, and to administer medicine in accordance with the actual process and nature of the illness. Thirdly, there are advantages in the results of the treatment; herbal medicine can relieve symptoms, promote absorption of lung inflammation, improve the degree of blood oxygen saturation, regulate immunological functions, reduce the required dosage of glucocorticoid and other Western medicines, and reduce case fatality rate, in addition to lowering the cost of treatment.】

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Internal Korean MedicineSame topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207