Gastroparesis: Prevalence, Clinical Significance and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of novel techniques to quantify gastric motor function and gastric emptying has yielded important insights into the prevalence, pathogenesis and clinical sequelae of gastroparesis. Both acute and chronic gastroparesis occur frequently; gastric emptying of solids is delayed in 30% to 50% of patients with diabetes mellitus, functional dyspepsia and gastroesophageal reflux disease. While many patients with gastroparesis experience upper gastrointestinal symptoms that adversely affect quality of life, the concept that symptoms are inevitably the direct outcome of delay in gastric emptying is now recognized to be overly simplistic. In contrast, the potential impact of gastroparesis on oral drug absorption and blood glucose control in patients with diabetes mellitus has probably been underestimated. While the use of prokinetic drugs (cisapride, domperidone, metoclopramide and erythromycin) forms the mainstay of therapy in symptomatic patients with gastroparesis, a number of novel pharmacological therapies are being evaluated, and preliminary studies using gastric pacing show promise.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".