Anorexigens and Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anorexigens are drugs that suppress appetite mainly bymodulating the serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)] signaling pathway in the brain. It was always obvious that the efficacy of anorexigens was at most modest, leading to sustained weight reductions of only 5-10% more than placebo and diet alone. A significant group of anorexigen users had been minimally above the ideal body weight, and thus one can see these compounds as examples of ‘‘image-enhancing drugs’’ rather than tools against the battle of obesity. The industry of image-enhancing drugs has always been powerful and has repeatedly won over common sense and independent scientific thinking. The anorexigen story is an interesting example of the failure of Poincare´’s principle: The method of the physical sciences is based upon the induction which leads us to expect recurrence of a phenomenon when the circumstances which give rise to it are repeated. (H. Poincare´, Science and Hypothesis, 1905.) SM is a CIHR Strategic Fellow (TORCH program) and a Fellow in the University of Alberta Clinician Investigator Program. y EM is a CIHR New Investigator and AHFMR Scholar.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".