Insights into the role of cannabis in the management of inflammatory bowel disease
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
Over the last decade, interest in the therapeutic potential of cannabis and its constituents (e.g. cannabidiol) in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) has escalated. Cannabis has been increasingly approved for a variety of medical conditions in several jurisdictions around the world. In animal models, cannabinoids have been shown to improve intestinal inflammation in experimental models of IBD through their interaction with the endocannabinoid system. However, the few randomized controlled trials of cannabis or cannabidiol in patients with IBD have not demonstrated efficacy in modulating inflammatory disease activity. Cannabis may be effective in the symptomatic management of IBD. Given the increasing utilization and cultural acceptance of cannabis, physicians need to be aware of its safety and efficacy in order to better counsel patients. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the role of cannabis in the management of patients with IBD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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