MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133608331 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.617625

A Comparative Study for License Application Regulations on Proprietary Chinese Medicines in Hong Kong and Canada

2021· article· en· W3133608331 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPlant-based Medicinal Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of TorontoNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaUniversity of TorontoHong Kong Baptist University
KeywordsLicenseQuality (philosophy)BusinessProduct (mathematics)Traditional Chinese medicineMedicineMarketingTraditional medicineAlternative medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethnopharmacological Relevance: Chinese Medicine plays a symbolic role among traditional medicines. As Chinese Medicine products are widely used around the globe, regulations for Chinese Medicine products are often used as models for the efficient regulation of natural products that are safe, and high-quality. Aim of the Study: We aimed to compare the regulatory registration requirements for Proprietary Chinese Medicines in Hong Kong and Canada. Materials and Methods: We compared registration requirements for Proprietary Chinese Medicine in Hong Kong and Canada based on publicly available information provided by the respective Regulators. A marketed product, Zhizhu Kuanzhong Capsule (SFDA approval number Z20020003; NPN approval number 80104354), was used as a case study to demonstrate the similarities and differences of the requirements in both Hong Kong and Canada. Results: There were similarities and differences between the two regulatory systems in terms of the quality, safety and efficacy requirements. Despite the superficial appearance of similar categories and groups/classes, Hong Kong requires significantly more primary test data compared to Canada's reliance on attestation to manufacturing according the standards outlined in approved reference pharmacopeias/texts. Conclusion: Improved understand of the similarity and differences will enable applicants to plan appropriate strategies for gaining product approval. Exploring ways to harmonize the regulatory process has the potential to benefit manufacturers, regulators, and patients by increasing efficiency and decreasing costs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.371 · 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