MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005554308 · doi:10.1016/j.redox.2020.101455

Waterpipe (shisha, hookah) smoking, oxidative stress and hidden disease potential

2020· review· en· W3005554308 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRedox Biology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxidative stressEnvironmental healthMedicineDiseaseSAFERCigarette smokingPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the abundant research on the harmful effects of cigarette smoking and the strict regulations enacted by many health authorities, many smokers are seeking for safer and more acceptable tobacco forms. Waterpipe (also known as shisha or hookah) use has increased dramatically during the past decade, mostly due to its improved taste, lack of regulations and social acceptability as a safer option than cigarettes. However, recent clinical and experimental studies indicate that waterpipe use is as, or even more, harmful than cigarettes. Although they differ in the method of consumption, waterpipe tobacco has similar deleterious constituents found in cigarettes but are generated at greater amounts. These constituents are known to induce oxidative stress and inflammation, the major underlying mechanisms of a wide array of chronic pathological conditions. We review the relationship between waterpipe tobacco use and oxidative stress and the disease potential of waterpipe use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.289 · 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