Risk Factors for Helicobacter pylori Infection in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The exact mode of transmission of Helicobacter pylori is yet to be established. Close personal contact among family members appears to be a key factor. The aim of this study was to establish whether sharing a bed or bedroom with an infected family member is an important risk factor for primary childhood H. pylori infection. METHODS: Fifty-two families with at least 1 child (the index case) with H. pylori infection were recruited. The resultant study population comprised 126 siblings of the index cases. H. pylori infection was established by culture or by histology and urease testing on antral biopsies in index cases and by C-urea breath testing in family members. Data regarding sleeping arrangements within the family were collected. RESULTS: Sharing a bed or bedroom with an infected sibling at the age of 3 years significantly increased the risk of childhood H. pylori infection [odds ratio, 4.84; 95% confidence intervals, 1.54-15.20; P < 0.01 and 3.68 (1.26-10.75), P = 0.017, respectively]. In addition, a child was at significantly increased risk of being infected if his/her mother or father was H. pylori-positive [odds ratio, 2.52; 95% confidence intervals, 1.03-6.13], P = 0.042 and 2.99 (1.04-8.61), P = 0.042, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Sharing a bed or bedroom with an infected sibling in early childhood increases significantly the risk of childhood H. pylori infection. This provides evidence to support horizontal transmission of H. pylori among siblings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".