Diretrizes para um Programa de Recolhimento de Medicamentos Vencidos no Brasil Guidelines for an Expired Medication Collection Program in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O objetivo deste artigo é apontar e discutir diretrizes fundamentais para um programa de recolhimento de medicamentos vencidos para o Brasil e evidenciar a importância de campanhas de conscientização da população para seu sucesso. Este é um trabalho de revisão descritiva de base documental que analisa documentos oficiais, técnicos e normativos, de Portugal, México, Canadá e Colômbia, onde existem recolhimento de medicamentos vencidos em diferentes estágios de implementação, alguns já consolidados, outros em fase inicial, mas todos com bons resultados. Os países citados foram escolhidos objetivando-se representação da Europa, América do Norte e América Latina. Seis diretrizes comuns foram apontadas: corresponsabilidade na cadeia de fabricação e distribuição do medicamento; minimização de resíduos como estratégia; realização de programa piloto; investigação e classificação dos resíduos gerados; intersetorialidade entre diferentes esferas do governo e campanhas de sensibilização e conscientização da comunidade. Estas diretrizes constituem uma base para um Programa de Recolhimento de Medicamentos Usados no Brasil.<br>The scope of this paper is to outline and discuss fundamental guidelines for an expired medication collection program for Brazil and to provide evidence supporting campaigns to raise the population's awareness for the program's success. It is a document-based descriptive review that analyzes official, technical and regulatory documents from Portugal, Canada and Colombia, where there are expired medication collection programs in different stages of implementation. Some of them are already fully implemented, while others are in the preliminary stages, but all of them are achieving good results. The countries listed above were chosen in order to represent Europe, North America and Latin America. Six common guidelines were outlined: co-responsibility in the drug's manufacturing and distribution chain; a strategy of minimization of waste; setting up pilot programs; investigation and classification of waste generated; inter-sectorial communication between different government bodies; and campaigns to raise the community's awareness. These guidelines represent the ground rules for an Expired Medication Collection Program in Brazil.
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 | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".