MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098522662 · doi:10.29173/spectrum92

Chemistry Review of Vaping Products and Respiratory Injury

2020· article· en· W3098522662 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsToxicologyMedicineChemical productsChemistryEnvironmental healthBiologyBiochemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: While the Public Health Agency of Canada notes 19 cases from May 2019 to February 2020 relating to e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) in Canada, there are likely many more unreported cases, including non-hospitalized and asymptomatic cases. E-cigarette use or vaping exposes users to numerous aerosolized chemical species, some of which have proven to be deleterious to health. These chemical species can include vitamin E acetate (VEA), flavourants, base / solvents (propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin), psychoactive substances, pesticides, endotoxins, metals, and pyrolysis by-products from e-cigarette heating coils. Objectives: We aim to review current findings related to EVALI from the standpoint of known chemical species currently used in vaping products. We specifically examine the toxicological profiles of these chemical species and the mechanisms through which they cause lung injury. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed with MEDLINE for EVALI-related human studies that were published between January 1, 2010, and May 15, 2020. This search strategy identified 832 case reports, case series, clinical trials, and in-vitro laboratory studies. From this group, 71 records were examined in greater detail. Results and Conclusions: Although the chemical composition and toxicology of vaping products have largely been characterized, the physiological effects of the chemical interactions between various constituents of vaping products and the generation of new species remain inconclusive. Given the rapid increase in the popularity of vaping and e-cigarettes, there is a need for further research. Developing a comprehensive understanding of the chronic health effects of vaping through randomized controlled trials and physiological studies is prudent and necessary to reduce the long-term impacts on users and the health care system.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.264 · 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