Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) as a class are remarkably safe and effective for persons with peptic ulcer disorders. Serious adverse events are extremely rare for PPIs, with case reports of interstitial nephritis with omeprazole, hepatitis with omeprazole and lansoprazole, and disputed visual disturbances with pantoprazole and omeprazole. PPI use is associated with the development of fundic gland polyps (FGP); stopping PPIs is associated with regression of FGP. In the absence of Helicobacter pylori infection, the long-term use of PPIs has not been convincingly proven to cause or be associated with the progression of pre-existing chronic gastritis or gastric atrophy or intestinal metaplasia. Mild/modest hypergastrinemia is a physiological response to the reduction in gastric acid secretion due to any cause. The long-term use of PPIs has not been convincingly proven to cause enterochromaffin-like cell hyperplasia or carcinoid tumors. PPIs increase the risk of community acquired pneumonia, but not of hospital acquired (nosocomial) pneumonia. There is no data to support particular care in prescribing PPI therapy due to concerns about risk of hip fracture with the long-term use of PPIs. Long-term use of PPIs does not lead to vitamin B12 deficiencies, except possibly in the elderly, or in persons with Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome who are on high doses of PPI for prolonged periods of time. There is no convincingly proven data that PPIs increase the risk of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in persons in the community. The discontinuation of PPIs may result in rebound symptoms requiring further and even continuous PPI use for suppression of symptoms. As with all medications, the key is to use PPIs only when clearly indicated, and to reassess continued use so that long-term therapy is used judiciously. Thus, in summary, the PPIs are a safe class of medications to use long-term in persons in whom there is a clear need for the maintenance of extensive acid inhibition.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".