MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391845484 · doi:10.1183/13993003.01623-2023

Lung transcriptome of e-cigarette users reveals changes related to chronic lung disease

2024· letter· en· W4391845484 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Biniam Kidane, Shana Kahnamoui, Sadeesh Srinathan, Richard Y. Liu, Lawrence Tan, Mélanie Morris, Anna C. Shawyer, Andrew J. Halayko, Christopher D. Pascoe

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
FundersInstitute of Circulatory and Respiratory Health
KeywordsMedicineDownloadConflict of interestThe InternetInternet privacyFamily medicinePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 1-in-10 adolescents use e-cigarette devices, with 25% reporting daily use [1]. Most youth who vape have never used traditional cigarettes, creating an emerging epidemic of nicotine addiction fueled by use of e-cigarettes [2]. Public perception is that e-cigarettes are less harmful than traditional cigarettes, a belief that may be fueled, in part, by a handful of tobacco industry-funded studies reporting null results in cells or animals, replicating past misinformation campaigns about traditional cigarettes [3]. Footnotes This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the European Respiratory Journal . It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJ online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article. Conflict of interest: Pierre-Régis Burgel reports support for the present manuscript from Association Vaincre la Mucoviscidose, Société Française de la Mucoviscidose, Filière Maladie Rare Muco CFTR. In addition, Pierre-Régis Burgel reports grants from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, GSK; consulting fees from Astra Zeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Insmed, Vertex, Viatris, Zambon; travel support Astra Zeneca, Chiesi; outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: No conflicts to report. Research funded by a grant from the Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR HEV-172883).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory Journal→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→