MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2540590733 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000114

WHO and national lists of essential medicines in Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean: are they adequate to promote paediatric endocrinology and diabetes care?

2016· article· en· W2540590733 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Rowlands, Alejandra Acosta-Gualandri, Jaime Guevara‐Aguirre, Jean‐Pierre Chanoine

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecialtyMedicineFamily medicineNational libraryDiabetes mellitusEssential medicinesTraditional medicineLibrary scienceEndocrinologyNursingComputer sciencePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paediatric endocrinology and diabetes is a paediatric specialty with less common conditions and higher cost medicines. Access to medicines for our specialty in low and middle income countries remains limited. We analysed the content of the WHO (children and adults) and of all available national Model Lists of Essential Medicines (EMLs) for Mexico, the Caribbean, Central and South America from a paediatric endocrinology and diabetes standpoint. A master list of medicines deemed necessary in paediatric endocrinology and diabetes was established and compared with the WHO and national EMLs, taking into account the gross national income. The WHO EMLs, which are largely recognised as an international benchmark and drive the content of the national EMLs, included many but not all medicines present on our master list. Interestingly, several national EMLs from richer countries included medicines that were not present in the WHO EMLs. Our analysis suggests that these medicines could be considered by the WHO for inclusion in their EMLs, which may promote the adoption of more medicines by individual countries. We also propose several changes to the WHO and national EMLs that could facilitate access to medicines in our specialty: age cut-off for a child using physical maturity rather than a set age limit; greater standardisation of the formatting of the national EMLs for easier comparison and collaborations between countries; greater emphasis on age-specificity and population-specificity for some medicines; and formatting of the EMLs in a disease-focused manner rather than as individual medicines.

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)0.000
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207