MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214601623 · doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2021.e01046

Mutual Pan-African support paradigm to produce scientific evidence of traditional medical practices for use against COVID-19 and emerging pandemics

2021· review· en· W3214601623 on OpenAlexaff
Michael O. Eze, Chukwunonso E.C.C. Ejike, Patrick Ifeonu, Javier Mignone, Chibuike C. Udenigwe, Peter N. Uzoegwu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific African · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health careMedical researchScientific evidenceHealthcare systemPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic relationsBusinessMedicineEconomicsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Africa is endowed with a profoundly rich and diverse system of plants and other bio-resources out of which, by traditional medicine practice, the people have satisfied their healthcare needs right from antiquity. In contemporary times, it has become necessary to modernize this traditional medical care system via scientific studies. Validation of the efficacy of health-enhancement products and drugs from plants and other bio-resources is predicated on diligent and intensive research accompanied by rigorous and conclusive clinical trials. Africa has eminently qualified human resources but due to the finance-intensive nature of medical research, individual African states on their own cannot fund the level of research desired for dealing with such serious issues as the COVID-19 pandemic. A collaboration among African states guided by a Mutual Pan-African support paradigm (MPASP) is a unique strategy for achieving success in any such a high-impact global project as the use of traditional medicine against COVID-19 and emerging pandemics; and this is hereby advocated.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.417
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.065 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific AfricanSame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207