MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991385024 · doi:10.2196/ijmr.2101

Open Access Capture of Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Using an Online Patient-Reported Outcomes Instrument

2012· article· en· W1991385024 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Merel M. Tielemans, Jan B.�M.�J. Jansen, Martijn G. van Oijen

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGERDMedicineRefluxRegurgitation (circulation)DiseaseHeartburnInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Gastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persons with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) frequently search online for information about causes and treatment options. The GerdQ self-assessment questionnaire can be used for diagnosis of GERD and follow-up of symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether it is feasible (1) to study the prevalence and impact of GERD in persons visiting a GERD information website, and (2) to identify partial responsiveness to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy using the GerdQ. METHODS: All visitors (aged 18-79 years) to a GERD information website between November 2008 and May 2011 were invited to complete the GerdQ online. The GerdQ questionnaire consists of 6 questions (score per question: 0-3). In respondents who did not use PPIs, we used the questionnaire to identify those with GERD (total score ≥8) and assess the influence of these symptoms on their daily life, divided into low (total score <3 on impact questions) and high impact (total score ≥3 on impact questions). In PPI users, we used the GerdQ to quantify partial responsiveness by any report of heartburn, regurgitation, sleep disturbance, or over-the-counter medication use for more than 1 day in the preceding week. We subsequently asked GerdQ respondents scoring ≥8 to complete the disease-specific Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 131,286 visitors completed the GerdQ, of whom 80.23% (n = 105,329) did not use a PPI. Of these, we identified 67,379 respondents (63.97%) to have GERD (n = 32,935; 48.88% high impact). We invited 14,028 non-PPI users to complete the QOLRAD questionnaire, of whom 1231 (8.78%) completed the questionnaire. Mean total QOLRAD scores were 5.14 (SEM 0.04) for those with high-impact GERD and 5.77 (SEM 0.04) for those with low-impact GERD (P < .001). In PPI users, 22,826 of 25,957 respondents (87.94%) reported partial responsiveness. We invited 6238 PPI users to complete the QOLRAD questionnaire, of whom 599 (9.60%) completed the disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire. Mean total QOLRAD scores were 4.62 (SEM 0.05) for partial responders and 5.88 (SEM 0.14) for adequate responders (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The GerdQ identified GERD in many website respondents and measured partial responsiveness in the majority of PPI users. Both non-PPI users with GERD and PPI users with partial responsiveness were associated with a decreased health-related quality of life. We have shown the feasibility of GERD patient identification online.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207