MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512011249 · doi:10.1002/cpt.460

An International Asset Map of Clinicians, Educators, and Researchers Pursuing Better Medicine Use in Children: Initial Findings

2016· article· en· W2512011249 on OpenAlexafffund
S.C. MacLeod, DC Knoppert, Shinya Ito, MJ Rieder

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of WaterlooUniversity of WaterlooWestern UniversityRobarts Clinical TrialsChild and Family Research InstituteChildren's Hospital of Western OntarioUniversity of TorontoBC Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAmerican College of Clinical PharmacyEuropean Society of Clinical PharmacyHospital for Sick ChildrenAGE-WELLWorld Bank Group
KeywordsEconomic shortageMedicineAsset (computer security)Medical educationClinical pharmacologyLatin AmericansFamily medicinePolitical sciencePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world's 1.89 billion children (age 0-14) too frequently receive treatments that have not been validated through clinical pharmacology research, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Initial findings from an international asset map of professionals and clinician scientists available to address the needs for education, research, and treatment support suggest a critical shortage of clinical pharmacologists, clinical pharmacists, and other professionals with advanced training in the evaluation of therapies for childhood conditions and illnesses. A total of 497 individuals responded to a survey conducted between May 2015 and February 2016. An alarming signal is apparent showing that, while the overall resource pool is unquestionably limited, 87% of relevant qualified personnel are located in high-income countries. The data suggest an urgent need for targeted training in pediatric clinical pharmacology, with particular focus on the needs in Africa, Latin America, and most of Asia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207