MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964856587 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707486

Cannabinoid CB<sub>2</sub> receptors in the gastrointestinal tract: a regulatory system in states of inflammation

2007· review· en· W1964856587 on OpenAlexaff
Karen L. Wright, Marnie Duncan, Keith A. Sharkey

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Pharmacology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammationCannabinoid receptor type 2Cannabinoid receptorGastrointestinal tractReceptorCannabinoidMedicineEndocannabinoid systemImmune systemImmunologyMotilityPharmacologyBiologyInternal medicineAgonist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emerging potential for the cannabinoid (CB) system in modulating gastrointestinal inflammation has gained momentum over the last few years. Traditional and anecdotal use of marijuana for gastrointestinal disorders, such as diarrhoea and abdominal cramps is recognized, but the therapeutic benefit of cannabinoids in the 21st century is overshadowed by the psychoactive problems associated with CB1 receptor activation. However, the presence and function of the CB2 receptor in the GI tract, whilst not yet well characterized, holds great promise due to its immunomodulatory roles in inflammatory systems and its lack of psychotropic effects. This review of our current knowledge of CB2 receptors in the gastrointestinal tract highlights its role in regulating abnormal motility, modulating intestinal inflammation and limiting visceral sensitivity and pain. CB2 receptors represent a braking system and a pathophysiological mechanism for the resolution of inflammation and many of its symptoms. CB2 receptor activation therefore represents a very promising therapeutic target in gastrointestinal inflammatory states where there is immune activation and motility dysfunction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations262
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of PharmacologySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207