Electrohomoeopathy Medicine in Covid-19 A Multicenter Clinical Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In December 2019, extreme acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease (COVID-19), was first detected In Wuhan City, China and later spread to several provinces in China and simultaneously outspreaded worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to a dramatic worldwide loss of human life and poses an unparalleled threat to public health, food systems and the world of work. The economic and social suffering inflicted by the pandemic is devastating millions of people are at risk of severe poverty specially in the developing country. We have several researches, review article, case study and medical journal for the explanation COVID-19. There are so many guideline recommendations issues by the WHO, various health authority and government for the prevention of COVID-19. How Electrohomoeopathy medicine used by various Electrohomoeopathy practitioners in there clinical as a prophylactic and preventive care but result was ultimate. Although, there were the collaborative appeached played an important role for fighting against virus where Ayuesh medicine and Electrohomoeopathy medicine worked in effective manner during this pandemic. Scientists all over the world, especially in India, are trying to find alternative medicines with minimal side effects. The main purpose of this research is to bring alternative medicines to the general public for the treatment of COVID-19. In this article, we are going to discuss how alternative system of medicine specially Electrohomoeopathy played a crucial role for the prevention and protection against the Corona virus. Total 56 patient included in this study who received Electrohomoeopathy medicine and concluded result. Objective: To analyze the clinical efficacy and prophylactic property of Electrohomeopathy medicine during the initial phase of COVID-19 with combination of conventional approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".