Prevalence of symptoms of gastroesopahgeal reflux in a cohort of Saudi Arabians: A study of 1265 subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In this study, we aimed to determine the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in the general population of the capital city of Riyadh and to assess its association with other factors including age, smoking, body mass index (BMI), asthma, as well as the presence of other co-morbid diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GerdQ) for diagnosing GERD, based on a GerdQ score of 8 or more. Riyadh was divided into four quadrants, and from each area, a single shopping mall was chosen randomly to conduct our surveys. Data collected included age, sex, history of smoking, history of asthma or any other medical condition, dietary habits, monthly household income, history and frequency of heartburn, epigastric pain, regurgitation of food, nausea, sleep disturbance from heartburn, the use of common over-the-counter antacids for the control of their symptoms, and their height and weight. RESULTS: Over a 4-week period from the 19 December 2012 to 17 January 2013, a total of 1265 individuals were included in the survey. The mean age was 29.97 ± 11.58 years. Females formed 67.81% of the respondents and 62.73% had one or more episodes of heartburn per week. Based on a cutoff GERDQ score of 8, the prevalence of GERD in the surveyed population was 45.4%. GERD was more prevalent in older individuals (mean age 31.9 vs. 30.0 years, P < 0.001) and in those with a higher BMI (27.29 vs. 26.31 kg/m 2 , P = 0.02). There was no difference between males (45.43%) and females (45.13%) (P = 0.92); there was a trend of a higher prevalence in smokers (51.63% vs. 44.41%), but it did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Symptoms suggestive of GERD as determined by the translated GerdQ are prevalent among this study population.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".