MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Review article: the unmet needs in delayed‐release proton‐pump inhibitor therapy in 2005

2005· review· en· W2086150474 on OpenAlexaff
Richard H. Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProton-pump inhibitorUpper gastrointestinal bleedingHelicobacter pyloriInternal medicineGastroenterologyStress ulcerDrugGastrointestinal bleedingDiseasePharmacotherapyIntensive care medicinePharmacologyEndoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proton-pump inhibitors have been highly effective in managing acid-related gastrointestinal disorders, but challenges remain. This paper reviews the challenges in the management of patients with gastro-oesophageal symptoms who do not respond adequately to proton-pump inhibitor therapy; the treatment of patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding; the prevention of stress-related mucosal bleeding; the treatment and prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related gastrointestinal injury; and the optimal combination of antisecretory and antibiotic therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection, all of which represent unmet clinical needs. Antisecretory therapy with a rapid onset of action and sustained antisecretory effect may help to address some of the unmet needs discussed, especially in the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related gastrointestinal complications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations57
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studiesFrench-language works237,207