Shower power: a case report of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cannabis use is becoming more common globally, making it important for physicians to be aware of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS). CHS presents in chronic cannabis users, typically under the age of 50, and entails a severe cyclic nausea and vomiting pattern with abdominal pain but normal bowel habits. Symptoms typically predominate in the morning, are relieved by hot baths or showers, and resolve with discontinuation of cannabis use. This report details a case of a 32-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department at a large Canadian hospital with severe nausea, vomiting and a history of regular use of marijuana cigarettes. In an attempt to alleviate her symptoms she reported taking frequent hot baths and using as many as five marijuana cigarettes per day. The patient’s clinical presentation, chronic daily use of marijuana and relief of symptoms with hot baths led to the diagnosis of CHS. The antiemetic properties of cannabis are widely known in the community, meaning patients may not associate marijuana use with their symptoms. Additionally, cyclic vomiting syndrome is present in many different conditions, making physician awareness of this syndrome crucial. Recognition and diagnosis of this condition can prevent unnecessary, costly diagnostic tests, and provide an opportunity to initiate counselling on cessation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".