MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410826759 · doi:10.52711/0974-360x.2025.00344

Nutraceuticals in Reproductive and Urinary Disorders: A Brief Review

2025· review· en· W4410826759 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and Technology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytoestrogen effects and research
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary systemMedicineGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nutraceuticals are the food supplements that play a vital role to maintain healthy body and provide essential supplements required by the body in order to regulate body’s metabolic process as well as to prevent from diseases. Nature provides us a vast diversified flora and fauna which are used tremendously from a long time by different civilizations for their health promoting effects. Unlike modern day synthetic drugs, nutraceuticals have the ability to provide both preventive action as well as nutritive action without exerting any adverse effects. Nutraceuticals have gained interest worldwide due to their nutritional and therapeutic effects without any toxic issues. The substances derived from foods and dietary supplements have shown different metabolic and biological actions on reproductive system in both human as well as animals. The present review discusses the use of nutraceuticals in different reproductive health anomalies. Articles were gathered using search engines such as Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and ScienceDirect.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.425 · 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