MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132933546

Self-Reported Medical Cannabis Use and Inflammatory Cytokines and Chemokines in Chronic Pain Patients

2023· dissertation· W7132933546 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Prabjit Ajrawat

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2023
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsEotaxinAnalgesicCannabisProinflammatory cytokineChemokineChronic painImmune system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation investigated the association between medical cannabis (MC) use and inflammatory immune markers among chronic pain (CP) patients. Validated questionnaires, self-reported effectiveness of MC, and patient blood samples were collected. Fifty-six patients (64% females) were included with dried cannabis (53%) and THC-dominant products (70%) most commonly consumed. Majority of patients (83- 96%) self-reported symptom relief and and 76% reported a significant decrease in analgesic medication usage (p = <0.001). Compared to males, females had lower concentrations of some pro-inflammatory cytokines, cortisol, and significantly lower eotaxin levels (p=0.04). The regression analysis indicated that female sex was associated with decreased eotaxin (p = <0.01) concentrations. Blood CBD levels were associated with lower VEGF (p=0.04) concentrations and THC-COOH was a factor related to decreased TNF-α (p=0.02) and IL-12p70 (p=0.03). These findings suggest cannabis improves CP symptoms, reduces analgesic consumption, and has a potential immunomodulatory effect associated with patient sex and product type.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→