MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323566916 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1103555

Characteristics, risk management and GMP standards of pharmaceutical companies in China

2023· article· en· W4323566916 on OpenAlexaff
Hong Chen, Lijian Qin, Cong Jiang, Mingshuai Qin, Yanming Sun, Jingjing Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessGood manufacturing practiceQuality (philosophy)ChinaProduction (economics)Product (mathematics)Risk analysis (engineering)Industrial organizationMarketingAccountingFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) is one of the gold standards by which governments worldwide judge modern pharmaceutical companies' production processes and product-safety standards. However, in all the nations, it is difficult to obtain real data about GMP inspection results, so conducting the related research is impossible. Taking advantage of a rare chance to obtain the on-site GMP inspection results in China, we have been able to initiate an empirical analysis of how company characteristics and risk management affect the GMP inspection results of certain pharmaceutical companies. The 2SLS method regression was employed in this study. Our four main findings are as follows. First, compared with Chinese state-owned companies, foreign commercial and private enterprises are held to higher standards. Second, the GMP inspection results tend to be better for those enterprises whose main sources of capital are not dependent on bank loans. Third, enterprises with higher fixed assets tend to receive the better GMP inspection results. Fourth, the longer the quality authorized staff has worked in a company, the better the GMP inspection results expected of that enterprise. These findings offer insights into inspections and production improvements in China and other GMP-compliant countries.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207