Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of marijuana as a medicinal agent is an old practice in many parts of the world. In recent decades it has gained increased attention of the general public and of the medical profession. Ten states and Canada have legalized medical marijuana; physicians prescribe it for nausea and vomiting in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. They also prescribe it for appetite loss and wasting in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Controversies exist about its use in the treatment of glaucoma, spasticity or chronic intractable pain. Though state governments have passed laws authorizing physicians to prescribe marijuana, the federal government contends that the drug is a Schedule I agent with no medicinal use, a high potential for abuse and no accepted safety for use in medically-supervised treatment. There are legal issues regarding its use as a medicinal agent, and the United States Supreme Court has provided rulings on these matters. This paper will explore those controversies, the history of medical marijuana and the implications for its future use as a therapeutic agent in this country.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".