Bibliographic record
Abstract
SALES GROWTH FOR THE WORLD'S major pharmaceutical companies continued in early 2003 at a pace slightly above the average set the previous year. Combined first-quarter sales for 14 leading drug firms rose to $68.3 billion, up 6.5% compared with the first quarter of 2002. Half the companies reported healthy sales growth of between 9 and 21%, based in part on the strength of new products. Among the launches were Abbott Laboratories' arthritis drug Humira, Astra-Zeneca's oncology drug Iressa, Eli Lilly's Strattera for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and Forteo for osteoporosis, and the anticholesterol drug Zetia from Merck and Schering-Plough. Johnson & Johnson continued its pattern of stable growth with sales up 12.3% to $9.82 billion and earnings up 137% to $2.09 billion. Separately, its three health care businesses had equally strong sales increases: Consumer health care grew 11.7%, pharmaceuticals were up 11.6%, and medical devices and diagnostics gained 13.7%. There ...
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.086 | 0.045 |
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".