MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410876285 · doi:10.3791/68094

Development of a Preclinical Inhalation Model to Test Vaporized Cannabis Distillates

2025· article· en· W4410876285 on OpenAlexaff
Roham Gorgani, Valérie Orsat, David H. Eidelman, Carolyn J. Baglole

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityChristie (Canada)McGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInhalationCannabisMedicineInhalation exposurePharmacologyAnesthesiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their growing popularity, cannabis vape products remain understudied. Cannabis vape cartridges are used with battery-powered devices that aerosolize cannabis flower extracts containing high concentrations of cannabinoids such as THC. These types of products are commonly known as cannabis distillates. The potency of these products presents challenges in establishing effective dosing for preclinical studies. Currently, there are no established, standardized preclinical models for testing the safety and efficacy of these products in ways analogous to human use patterns. Thus, the in vivo cannabis distillate exposure regime required to achieve physiologically relevant doses in comparison to what is achieved in humans remains undetermined. To address this gap, a standardized preclinical murine model for inhalation of vaporized cannabis distillates has been developed using a computer-controlled delivery system. This protocol details procedures to administer cannabis vape distillates using a regimented puff topography to mice by a nose-only exposure tower. Methods to monitor mouse behavioral outcomes post-exposure and the utilization of a semi-quantitative ELISA to confirm THC delivery into the systemic circulation are also provided. This protocol will allow for the investigation of the pulmonary and systemic responses to cannabis vape distillate products by researchers interested in exploring the impact of cannabis vaping using real-world delivery protocols, thereby providing an opportunity for rigorous safety and therapeutic evaluation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.438 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207