MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407641652 · doi:10.3390/su17041670

Quality Risk Management in the Final Operational Stage of Sterile Pharmaceutical Manufacturing: A Case Study Highlighting the Management of Sustainable Related Risks in Product Sterilization, Inspection, Labeling, Packaging, and Storage Processes

2025· article· en· W4407641652 on OpenAlexaff
Bassam Elmadhoun, Rawidh Alsaidalani, Frank J. Burczynski

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSterilization (economics)Risk analysis (engineering)Quality managementQuality (philosophy)Product (mathematics)Operations managementPharmaceutical manufacturingGood manufacturing practiceRisk managementBusinessManufacturing engineeringWaste managementEngineeringManagement systemMedicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quality risk management, commonly known as QRM, is designed to systematically assess, control, communicate, and review potential risks at every stage of the pharmaceutical manufacturing process. The preservation of consistent product quality across the entirety of the product’s life cycle is of paramount importance. The aim of this article is to formulate a best practice guide that will assist pharmaceutical manufacturers in comprehending and implementing the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Q9: quality risk management principles. A widely recognized methodology for defining and monitoring risk mitigation strategies within the pharmaceutical sector is the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). ICH Q9 does not, however, offer detailed instructions for applying FMEA to real-world pharmaceutical situations. We previously provided real-world case studies that identify and mitigate risks in the early stages of the manufacturing process of sterile products, such as (1) supply chain and procurement; (2) logistics and warehousing; (3) raw material dispensing; (4) glass bottle washing and handling; (5) product filling; and (6) final product receiving and handling. The final steps of the sterile manufacturing process are the subject of the case study we present in this paper. We identify and control the risks related to (I) product sterilization; (II) product inspection, labeling, and packaging; (III) the finished product’s transfer to storage; and (IV) storing finished products in a warehouse. In order to maximize decision-making and reduce the risk of regulatory noncompliance, this case study describes a proactive strategy for the identification, management, and communication of risks associated with crucial tasks. While each organization’s products and methods are distinct, with varying tolerances for risk, certain stages and associated risks are common. Consequently, the examples provided here offer relevant insights into any pharmaceutical production environment. Managing sustainability-related risks and ensuring the transparency of pharmaceutical company operations are key tasks of success today. These risks, if not managed, will cause serious problems and a negative reputation, as well as environmental and public impact.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.445
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicSafe Handling of Antineoplastic DrugsFrench-language works237,207