MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145310134 · doi:10.14814/phy2.12269

An assessment of human gastric fluid composition as a function of PPI usage

2015· article· en· W2145310134 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Foltz, S. Azad, Mary Lou Everett, Zoie E. Holzknecht, Nathan L. Sanders, J. Will Thompson, Laura G. Dubois, William Parker, Shaf Keshavjee, Scott M. Palmer, R. Duane Davis, Shu S. Lin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPepsinTrypsinGastric fluidStomachGastroenterologyMedicineInternal medicineChemistryPopulationChromatographyEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The standard of care for chronic gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD), which affects up to 40% of the population, is the use of drugs such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) that block the production of stomach acid. Despite widespread use, the effects of PPIs on gastric fluid remain poorly characterized. In this study, gastric fluid was collected from patients undergoing cardiac surgery who were not (n = 40) or were (n = 25) actively taking PPIs. Various enzymatic and immunoassays as well as mass spectrometry were utilized to analyze the concentrations of bile, gastricsin, trypsin, and pepsin in the gastric fluid. Proteomic analyses by mass spectrometry suggested that degradation of trypsin at low pH might account, at least in part, for the observation that patients taking PPIs have a greater likelihood of having high concentrations of trypsin in their gastric fluid. In general, the concentrations of all analytes evaluated varied over several orders of magnitude, covering a minimum of a 2000-fold range (gastricsin) and a maximum of a 1 × 10(6) -fold range (trypsin). Furthermore, the concentrations of various analytes were poorly correlated with one another in the samples. For example, trypsin and bile concentrations showed a significant (P < 0.0001) but not strong correlation (r = 0.54). Finally, direct assessment of bacterial concentrations by flow cytometry revealed that PPIs did not cause a profound increase in microbial load in the gastric fluid. These results further delineate the profound effects that PPI usage has on the physiology of the stomach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207