MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412164817 · doi:10.56238/sevened2025.028-001

CARDIOVASCULAR REPERCUSSIONS RESULTING FROM THE USE OF ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES BY YOUNG ADULTS

2025· book-chapter· en· W4412164817 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wagner de Brito Veras, Ana Carolina Marim Favarato, Anne Carolliny Kaffler Barboza, Isabela Marastoni Durão Romualdo, Marco Siqueira Bolzani

Bibliographic record

VenueSeven Editora eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychologyGerontologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This integrative review aimed to investigate the relationship between the use of electronic cigarettes and the occurrence of cardiovascular outcomes in young adults. Initially, the analysis intended to include individuals aged 18 to 28; however, due to the scarcity of specific studies, it was necessary to expand the age range to 18 to 54 years. The literature search was conducted using the PubMed, LILACS, and ScienceDirect databases, employing controlled descriptors and specific Boolean operators. After identifying 57 articles and removing duplicates, 11 studies were selected for full reading and analysis. The extracted data were organized in a comparative table including author, title, study type, exposure, analyzed outcome, and main findings. The methodological quality of observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The analysis revealed that the use of electronic cigarettes is associated with significant adverse effects on cardiovascular health, including endothelial dysfunction, increased oxidative stress, arterial stiffness, autonomic nervous system alterations, and a higher predisposition to thrombogenicity. These findings highlight the need for further longitudinal studies to clarify long-term effects and the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeven Editora eBooksSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207