Intake of wine, beer and spirits and risk of gastric cancer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective was to study prospectively the relation between quantity and type of alcohol and risk of gastric cancer. In a pooled database from three population studies conducted in 1964-1992, a total of 15,236 men and 13,227 women were followed for a total of 389,051 person-years. During follow-up 122 incident cases of gastric cancer were identified. Total alcohol intake itself was not associated with gastric cancer, but type of alcohol seemed to influence risk. Compared with non-wine drinkers, participants who drank 1-6 glasses of wine had a relative risk ratio of 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-1.16), whereas those who drank >13 glasses of wine per week had a relative risk ratio of 0.16 (95% CI 0.02-1.18). Linear trend test showed a significant association with a relative risk ratio of 0.60 (95% CI 0.39-0.93) per glass of wine drunk per day. These relations persisted after adjustment for age, gender, educational level, body mass index, smoking habits, inhalation and physical activity. There was no association between beer or spirits drinking and gastric cancer. In conclusion, the present study suggests that a daily intake of wine may prevent development of gastric cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it