GERD and Obesity: Is the Autonomic Nervous System the Missing Link?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic condition that not only impairs the quality of life of those who are affected by it but also poses a significant economic burden. It encompasses a wide spectrum of symptoms as a result of gastric content moving into the esophagus. The most common cause of GERD, other than a hiatus hernia, is considered to be transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxation. The lower esophageal sphincter (LES) normally has a higher resting tone than the stomach, thus preventing the reflux of gastric contents into the esophagus. The greater prevalence of GERD and GERD symptoms in obese individuals has generated significant interest in understanding the association between these 2 conditions and the underlying physiological mechanisms. The potential relationship between GERD and obesity and the exact mechanism by which obesity may cause reflux, however, remains uncertain. It has been proposed that patients with GERD have altered autonomic nervous function and, more specifically, have reduced parasympathetic activity. Obese individuals also have shown diminished parasympathetic activity, which may be reversed after weight reduction through exercise, diet control, and bariatric surgery. Given that contraction and relaxation of the LES are vagally mediated, the question that arises is whether the autonomic nervous system is, in fact, the missing link between obesity and GERD. In this article we examine the current evidence and hypothesize that the potential imbalance in sympathovagal stimulation to the LES is a key contributing factor to the increased prevalence of GERD symptoms in obese individuals.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".