MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098033347

Caffeinated energy drinks in children.

2013· article· en· W2098033347 on OpenAlexaff
Ran D. Goldman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulantHarmMedicineCaffeineEnvironmental healthAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPsychiatryConsumption (sociology)PediatricsPsychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: A 14-year-old boy came to my office to discuss his frequent consumption of energy drinks to enhance his performance at school and while playing soccer. What is the recommended use of energy drinks in children and is there any harm in consuming them? ANSWER: Energy drinks are beverages with a high concentration of caffeine and additional stimulants. They are sold in numerous places and are easily accessed by children, adolescents, and young adults. Many reports warn about potential adverse effects associated with their consumption, especially in combination with alcohol among adolescents, and in combination with stimulant medications among children treated for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Children and adolescents should avoid energy drinks, and health care providers should educate youth and their parents about the risks of caffeinated drinks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207