MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980462572 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz137

Teen vaping: There is no vapour without fire

2019· article· en· W2980462572 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Chadi, Richard E. Bélanger

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNicotineAddictionMedicinePsychological interventionEnvironmental healthAction (physics)PsychiatryNicotine Addiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-cigarettes have become the most important source of nicotine exposure among adolescents. While e-cigarettes may have the potential to help some adults quit smoking, there is a lack of reliable evidence that this would apply to adolescents. On the contrary, e-cigarette use is associated with subsequent use of cigarettes and other tobacco products in teens and is also associated with increased use of alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs. Research on the health effects of e-cigarettes is rapidly emerging suggesting that they carry several acute and long-term risks, particularly for adolescents' still-developing bodies and brains. While several strategies to help youth quit smoking exist, much less is known about effective clinical interventions for adolescents presenting with an addiction to nicotine consumed through e-cigarettes. We discuss the latest research on e-cigarettes with a focus on health effects in youth and propose potential avenues for concerted action among paediatric providers and decision makers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207