Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of cannabis for skin diseases and hair regrowth is at the preliminary stage. LEGALIZATION: Many countries have approved cannabis for medical use; however, four countries Canada, Uruguay, South Africa, and Georgia have legalized it for both medical and recreational purposes. THE ENDOCANNABINOID SYSTEM: The endocannabinoid system may maintain skin homeostasis; two notable endocannabinoids include 2-Arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and N-arachidonoylethanolamine (AEA). ROUTES OF ADMINISTRATION AND PHARMACOKINETICS: Topical cannabinoids can avoid the first-pass metabolism and reduce respiratory side effects; however, the high hydrophobicity of cannabinoids may hinder percutaneous absorption. SKIN DISORDERS AND HAIR GROWTH: Human clinical studies suggest that cannabinoids may be used in eczema, acne, pruritus, and systemic sclerosis treatment. Cannabidiol (CBD) may enhance hair growth via multiple mechanisms. SAFETY: Topical cannabis may cause mild side effects such as pruritus, burning, erythema, and stinging; they are relatively safer than inhalation and oral cannabis. Cannabis use may be associated with allergic symptoms and reduced immune response to live vaccination. CANNABINOIDS IN PRACTICE: Despite growing interest, dermatologists should be cautious prescribing cannabinoids due to insufficient clinical data on both efficacy and safety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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.
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".