MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811486904 · doi:10.3138/jammi.2018.01.04

Reforming Canada’s Special Access Programme (SAP) to improve access to off-patent essential medicines

2018· article· en· W2811486904 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Adam R. Houston, Catherine-Marie Blais, Stan Houston, Brian J. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEssential medicinesAccess to medicinesBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Mechanism (biology)Essential drugsFree accessFunction (biology)Health careMedicineDeveloping countryEconomic growthEnvironmental healthComputer scienceHealth servicesWorld Wide WebEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many essential medicines, including basic drugs such as albendazole, do not have approval to be marketed in Canada. Instead, they are only available through a federal government mechanism: the Special Access Programme (SAP). SAP was designed as a mechanism to provide emergency access to new drugs not yet authorized for sale, not for proven medicines that appear on the World Health Organization (WHO) Model List of Essential Medicines. Because it was never intended or designed to fulfill this function, SAP creates needless access barriers that inhibit timely and effective care, particularly for patients with tropical, parasitic, and other infectious diseases. Regulatory changes to resolve this problem are readily achievable and should be prioritized.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease CanadaSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207