Upper gastrointestinal bleedings in patients with hereditary coagulation disorders in Northwest of Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding is one of the most life-threatening complications, in up to 25% of persons with hemophilia (PWH). Recurrent bleeding is common and can be caused by the Helicobacter pylori infection. Our aim was to evaluate the role of H. pylori infection in UGI bleeding in PWH. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety patients with hereditary bleeding disorders, 30 patients with (group A), and 60 patients without (group B) a history of UGI bleeding episodes were included. The prevalence of H. pylori infection was investigated by stool antigen test, and serum serologic tests including immunoglobulin G and anti-CagA. RESULTS: Among 90 patients (81 men, nine women, mean age 31.30 ± 10.72 years), 66 patients with hemophilia A, 10 patients with hemophilia B, six patients with Von Willebrand disease, five patients with platelet function disorders, and three patients with other factor deficiencies were evaluated. About 46.7% of patients in group A, and 23.3% of patients in group B were anti-CagA-positive (P=0.02), whereas 76.7% of patients in group A and 51.7% of patients in group B had H. pylori immunoglobulin G antibodies (P=0.02). H. pylori antigen in stool was positive in 76.7% in group A and 55% in group B (P=0.03). No statistically significant difference was found between type and severity of diseases and risk of UGI. CONCLUSION: H. pylori infection should be considered as an important cause of UGI bleeding in PWH. We would recommend stool antigen test as a new and noninvasive screening test for diagnosis of H. pylori infection in all patients with hereditary hemorrhagic disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".