Medicinal intercultural plant garden: homeopathy and phyto-nutritional care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present article describes historic evolution conception process of an intercultural medicinal plant garden as a tool to construct social ecoperception about environmental health and cultural diversity, to improve environmental ethics. Through case study methodology it reports the process along five years. Hybrid Learning of Homeopathy, Phytotherapy, Bioethic were successful to scientific basic research initiation and novel biological research will be done using pathogenetic chemical markers to discuss biologic results. Results also show multi, inter and transdisciplinary effective activities and communications about primary care attention. Empirically, it has been developped a positive perception among patients, students and professionals about Homeopathy, as a qualitative humanized approach. Phytotherapy was mainly preconized by its nutraceutical, functional and adaptogenic effects. Indeed, intercultural medicinal plant garden construction process provided integrality of applied intercultural, interethnical and indigenous knowledge expressed from their affective memories and registered like an “open-air” intercultural plant collection (“plant library”), improving humanities as respect, ethic, kindness and integrated citizenship, besides the learning to coexist with complexity, singularity and self-direction without lost of professional ethic. So, as qualitative evaluation, it was considered that a mandate of equity, social justice and welfare to mental health promotion to this urban ethnic members and indigenous, as recommended in health promotion by the Ottawa Charter, has been fulfilled in this period (2018 – 2023) at this intersectoral ambulatory (which necessary includes medical anthropology and clinical bioethics studies) at Homeopathy Service, 7a Yard of General Hospital Santa Casa da Misericordia - Rio de Janeiro/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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".