MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997942208 · doi:10.1080/07853890310010014

Genetics of alcohol and tobacco use in humans

2003· review· en· W1997942208 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel F. Tyndale

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Medicine · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNicotineHeritabilityTwin studyConfoundingCandidate geneGeneticsAlcohol dependenceMissing heritability problemNicotine dependenceBiologyHuman geneticsGeneBioinformaticsMedicineGenetic variantsAlcoholNeuroscienceGenotypePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of genetics holds great promise for furthering our understanding of the etiology of drug dependence and for identifying novel targets for treatment. Genetic studies utilizing twins and families have demonstrated a considerable role for genetics in nicotine and/or alcohol dependence. Risk for alcoholism or nicotine dependence is likely to be the result of a large number of genes, each contributing a small fraction of the overall risk. While this review will focus on studies in humans, many of the candidate genes for human nicotine and alcohol dependence listed here were originally postulated to be important, based on data from animal studies. The review will briefly summarize the results from twin and adoption studies that provide estimations of heritability, the results from chromosomal linkage studies that identify regions of chromosomes that may contain relevant genes, and the results of candidate gene studies. For each topic the data will be presented for nicotine dependence, alcohol dependence, and for nicotine and alcohol dependence together. In addition, each section will review briefly some of the confounding issues in the specific type of approach utilized.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.334
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.118 · 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

Citations219
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of MedicineSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207