MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404532443 · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmae067

Proper counseling for diagnosis and management of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome: a case report

2024· article· en· W4404532443 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Cholette-Tétrault, Roland Grad

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la MontagneMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNauseaCannabisVomitingAbdominal painPediatricsIntervention (counseling)EpidemiologyPsychiatryIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is an increasingly recognized condition linked to chronic cannabis use, yet it remains frequently overlooked in clinical practice. The syndrome is characterized by cyclic episodes of severe nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain, often relieved temporarily by hot showers or baths. With the rising prevalence of cannabis use following its legalization, the incidence of CHS has surged, presenting a significant challenge in both diagnosis and management within primary healthcare settings. Understanding the epidemiology, risk factors, and potential long-term sequelae of CHS is crucial for timely identification and intervention. This case report highlights the challenge of diagnosis and management of CHS in primary healthcare. OBJECTIVE(S): To emphasize the importance of proper counseling and the use of Rome IV criteria in diagnosing CHS. To illustrate how this may reduce patient suffering and unnecessary investigation. CASE: A 22-year-old female with chronic, daily cannabis use presented with recurrent episodes of intense nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain over a 2-year period. Extensive diagnostic evaluations were inconclusive. A tentative diagnosis of CHS was made by a medical student and family doctor based on published criteria. The Rome IV criteria were then applied for confirmation of diagnosis and management. In so doing, the patient was advised to cease cannabis use for a minimum of 3 months. Initially, symptom improvement was reported with cannabis cessation. However, symptoms recurred following a relapse in cannabis use. CONCLUSION: To confirm the diagnosis of CHS, counseling should specify the need for a minimum of 3 months of cannabis cessation to achieve symptom relief. Increased physician and patient awareness of this minimal time period for drug cessation can help to avoid unnecessary investigations, and prolonged patient suffering. This case emphasizes the need for vigilance in recognizing CHS and consideration of cannabis as a potential cause of cyclic vomiting.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamily PracticeSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207