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
Purpose: While cannabis has the potential to reduce corneal pain, cannabinoids might induce side effects. This review article examines the effects of cannabinoids on the cornea. As more states and countries consider the legalization of adult cannabis use, health-care providers will need to identify ocular effects of cannabis consumption.Methods: Studies included in this review examined the connection between cannabis and the cornea, more specifically anti-nociceptive and anti-inflammatory actions of cannabinoids. NCBI Databases from 1781 up to December 2019 were consulted.Results: Five studies examined corneal dysfunctions caused by cannabis consumption (opacification, decreased endothelial cell density). Twelve studies observed a reduction in corneal pain and inflammation (less lymphocytes, decreased corneal neovascularization, increased cell proliferation and migration).Conclusion: More than half of the studies examined the therapeutic effects of cannabinoids on the cornea. As the field is still young, more studies should be conducted to develop safe cannabinoid treatments for corneal diseases.
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 | 0.000 | 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