Impact of marijuana smoking on lung function in older persons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most previous epidemiological studies support a significant association between marijuana smoking and chronic respiratory symptoms [1], but the effects on lung function remain unclear. Previous longitudinal cohort studies have focused largely on young adults [1]. The results from these studies have shown that marijuana smoking produced marginal or no effects on lung function, which is expected given that with even heavy cigarette exposure, meaningful changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) or forced vital capacity (FVC) are hard to discern in young adults. Lung function changes, however, accelerate in older age groups and the impact of respiratory irritants and toxins on lung function becomes much more evident [2]. To our knowledge, our study is the first longitudinal study of marijuana smoking in older individuals in a general population whose median age was 65 years [3]. The results of the present study addressed a major gap in marijuana research by demonstrating that marijuana smoking amplifies the harmful effects of tobacco smoking on the risk of COPD and FEV1 decline over time. Marijuana smoke exposure amplifies the harmful effects of cigarette smoke
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".