Environmental risk factors in multiple sclerosis: the role of active and passive cigarette smoke exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory neurodegenerative disease, and although the cause of MS remains unknown, it is widely accepted that both genetic and environmental factors play a role. The purpose of this thesis was to investigate the role of active and passive cigarette smoke exposure, both of which have been recently implicated as possible risk factors for MS. A systematic review was performed to consolidate the existing literature on smoking and MS. This review resulted in 20 published articles, 17 of which reported on active smoke exposure, and 3 that reported on passive smoke exposure as a risk factor for MS. Of the studies reported in these 20 articles, one study was judged to be of excellent quality, 5 studies were of good quality, 9 studies of acceptable quality, and the remaining 5 studies of poor quality. The second part of this thesis investigated active cigarette smoke exposure and passive cigarette smoke exposure (among never-smokers) in the etiology of MS using data from the Norwegian component of the International Case-Control Study on Environmental risk factors in Multiple Sclerosis (EnvIMS). Cases (N=807) were frequency matched to controls (N=1716) on sex and age at the time of study. Using a self-administered questionnaire, participants were asked about several environmental exposures, including their active smoke exposure in five year intervals between the ages 11 and 30, and household passive smoke exposure from birth to age 30. Consistent with the literature on active smoking, individuals with MS had a 2.19 (95% CI 1.82-2.63) greater odds of having smoked than controls. The relationship of passive smoke exposure and MS among never-smokers was not statistically significant, OR=1.20 (95% CI 0.83-1.76); however, the magnitude of the effect was consistent with previous literature. The research presented here confirms that active smoke exposure is a risk factor for MS, and although this study was not adequately powered to find a statistically significant effect, the results suggest that passive smoke exposure may also be a risk factor for MS.
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 | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".