MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004767137 · doi:10.26685/urncst.172

Effects of the Inhalation of Fenvalerate Combustion Products on the Respiratory, Digestive, Endocrine, and Muscular Systems of Mice: A Research Protocol

2020· article· en· W3004767137 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Laflamme, Rebecca Krnel, Jasmine Candeliere, Darius E. Stamatakos

Bibliographic record

VenueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPesticideToxicologyCannabisFenvalerateInhalationMedicineAdverse effectEnvironmental healthPharmacologyAnesthesiaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, very little scientific literature investigates the adverse health effects of pesticides found in cannabis. With the legalization of cannabis, regulation of pesticide usage must also be modified since these crops are not merely ingested, they are also smoked, creating new chemical compounds that are potentially harmful to the human body. That being said, research shows that the combustion of federally approved pesticides, such as fenvalerate, produces chemicals that are harmful when ingested, most notably hydrogen cyanide. This study will investigate the potential effects of the combustion products of fenvalerate when they are inhaled. By studying mice, we will investigate the potential effects of these products on their respiratory, digestive and muscular systems, as well as the potential effects on consumer health faced with long-term exposure to combustion by-products. Doing so will also enable the construction of a framework for determining adequate pesticides for industrial production of cannabis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.345 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUndergraduate Research in Natural and Clinical Science and Technology (URNCST) JournalSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207