MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392813310 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i6.2254

The Effect Of Smoking On High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL), Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL), And Triglycerides: A Review

2023· review· en· W4392813310 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rayed Fahad Alhammad, Anas Mohammed Aljabal, Fuad H Alqadi, Saif Saleh Alsaif, Abdulaziz Abdullah M Binsulaiteein, Seraj Mohammad Saleh Alhendi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh-density lipoproteinLow-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 8LipoproteinInternal medicineLow-density lipoproteinChemistryEndocrinologyVery low-density lipoproteinMedicineCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smoking is a well-known risk factor for a range of cardiovascular diseases. One of the mechanisms through which smoking exerts its negative effects on the cardiovascular system is by altering lipid profiles, including levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and triglycerides. This review aimed to investigate the effect of smoking on these lipid parameters based on current research evidence. A thorough search of relevant literature was conducted to gather data on the impact of smoking on HDL, LDL, and triglycerides. The results indicate that smoking is associated with decreased levels of HDL, increased levels of LDL, and elevated levels of triglycerides. These changes in lipid profiles can contribute to the development of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events in smokers. The implications of these findings for public health and clinical practice are discussed, as well as potential limitations of the current research and directions for future studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207