MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156403160 · doi:10.4021/gr379w

Proton Pump Inhibitors Interfere With Zinc Absorption and Zinc Body Stores

2011· article· en· W2156403160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicTrace Elements in Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZincMedicineGastroenterologyInternal medicineRefluxAbsorption (acoustics)Venous bloodZinc deficiency (plant disorder)DiseaseChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) cause a sharp elevation of gastro-duodenal luminal pH which in turn has resulted in reports of reduced absorption of magnesium and certain other nutrients. METHODS: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients on long-term PPI therapy (> 6 months) or healthy test subjects (not on any acid preventive or neutralizing medication) were administered oral doses of zinc gluconate (26.2 mg zinc, twice daily) for 14 days followed by 5 cc venous blood samples. Plasma was analyzed for total zinc content by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Baseline plasma and red blood cell zinc levels were also measured in these two groups when not taking any zinc supplementation. RESULTS: Plasma zinc levels of healthy controls increased by 126% during the period of zinc supplementation compared to only a 37% increase for individuals on long-term PPI therapy. On their normal diet (with no zinc supplementation), PPI-users had a 28% lower plasma zinc level than healthy controls (P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: PPI use dramatically reduces supplemental zinc uptake and can result in decreased zinc body stores. Certain individuals on long-term PPI therapy, such as infants being treated for colic, may be at risk for decreased systemic levels of trace metals needed for developmental, regenerative and immunological requirements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations52
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology ResearchSame topicTrace Elements in HealthFrench-language works237,207