The use of omeprazole to alleviate stomach ulcers in swine during periods of feed withdrawal.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlled trials were conducted to determine if treatment with the benzimidazole compound, omeprazole, would prevent gastric ulceration associated with feed withdrawal. Pigs were fed ad libitum, fasted for 24 h, or fasted for 48 h, and within each of these 3 groups the effect of no medication (controls), of 20 mg or 40 mg of omeprazole was evaluated on the pH of gastric fluid and the presence or absence of lesions in the pars esophagea. Medication with 40 mg of omeprazole resulted in significantly higher gastric pH 24 h after treatment compared with untreated pigs or pigs medicated with 20 mg of omeprazole. Fasting for 24 h or for 48 h, resulted in more pigs developing ulcers (15 of 25) than pigs allowed free access to feed (1 out of 10) (P = 0.01). The results of this trial suggest that omeprazole was effective in preventing some, but not all, of the tissue damage in the pars esophagea related to feed withdrawal. In addition to hydrochloric acid, possibly other components, such as bile acids in the fluid gastric contents, are important in causing epithelial injury.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".