MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404184380 · doi:10.32352/0367-3057.4.24.01

Counterfeit medical products in Ukraine and the world: terminology and definitions, distribution and detection

2024· article· en· W4404184380 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Serhii Lebed, А. С. Немченко

Bibliographic record

VenueFarmatsevtychnyi zhurnal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCounterfeitTerminologyMedical terminologyDistribution (mathematics)BusinessComputer scienceTraditional medicineMedicineHistoryPhilosophyLinguisticsMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the work was to analyze the terminology and definitions used in the national legislation of developed countries, as well as modern problems of the distribution and detection of drug falsification The object of the study were messages received by the global WHO system – The Global Surveillance and Monitoring System (GSMS), publications on the problems of the distribution of falsified drugs in scientific publications and specialized mass media, regulatory documents of various countries that regulate the circulation of medicinal products. Analysis of scientific and public sources on the falsification of medicines in WHO member countries, as well as data published on the WHO website in the form of warnings, made it possible to establish that falsified medical products are widespread, this problem affects all regions, including highly developed countries, and any – what therapeutic categories of medicines. The most incidents were recorded in Great Britain, China and Nigeria (7 each), the USA and India (6 each), Cameroon (4), Colombia, Ghana, Congo, the Republic of Chad, Israel (3 each), France, Egypt, Turkey, Poland, Bangladesh, Malaysia. Iran, Uzbekistan (2 each), other countries (1 each). Such statistics indicate problems with the regulatory system in the pharmaceutical sector and the effectiveness of counterfeit detection mechanisms. A study of the meaning of the term «counterfeit medicinal product», which is given in the legislation of various countries of the world (Australia, Great Britain, Canada, the USA, China, India), in particular in Ukraine (the current and new version of the Law of Ukraine «On Medicinal Products») and in the EU suggests that this definition is constantly changing, with different countries/organizations offering their own distinctive definitions. With the new version of the Law of Ukraine «On Medicinal Products», the term «falsified medicinal product» was agreed with the definition proposed by the WHO and corresponds to Directive 2001/83/EC. At the same time, it is expedient to implement a new term for drugs that are illegally imported, illegally manufactured, or illegally put into circulation in domestic legislation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFarmatsevtychnyi zhurnalSame topicPharmaceutical Quality and CounterfeitingFrench-language works237,207