MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W343415374 · doi:10.1177/009885880603200205

State Regulation of Canadian Pharmacies: A Prescription to Violate the Supremacy Clause

2006· article· en· W343415374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Ellen Fleck Kleiman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Law & Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural safety and regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionSupremacy ClauseLawSupreme courtMedical prescriptionState (computer science)Political scienceFederal lawDormant Commerce ClauseMedicineLegislationPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Under the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, federal law, such as the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), is supposed to be the “supreme Law of the Land.” The FDCA establishes a national closed domestic distribution system for approved prescription drugs in an effort to ensure drug integrity and safety. In doing so, it purportedly sets the “gold standard” for prescription drugs regulation around the world. Lately, though, this “gold standard” has been tarnished by personal importation, the practice of buying prescription drugs directly from foreign pharmacies—primarily Canadian—in conflict with the FDCA's restrictions on unapproved drugs and importation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0130.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Law & MedicineSame topicAgricultural safety and regulationsFrench-language works237,207