Determination of ReQuest™-Based Symptom Thresholds to Define Symptom Relief in GERD Clinical Studies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The growing importance of symptom assessment is evident from the numerous clinical studies on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) assessing treatment-induced symptom relief. However, to date, the a priori selection of criteria defining symptom relief has been arbitrary. The present study was designed to prospectively identify GERD symptom thresholds for the broad spectrum of GERD-related symptoms assessed by the validated reflux questionnaire (ReQuest) and its subscales, ReQuest-GI (gastrointestinal symptoms) and ReQuest-WSO (general well-being, sleep disturbances, other complaints), in individuals without evidence of GERD. METHODS: In this 4-day evaluation in Germany, 385 individuals without evidence of GERD were included. On the first day, participants completed the ReQuest, the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale, and the Psychological General Well-Being scale. On the other days, participants filled in the ReQuest only. GERD symptom thresholds were calculated for ReQuest and its subscales, based on the respective 90th percentiles. RESULTS: GERD symptom thresholds were 3.37 for ReQuest, 0.95 for ReQuest-GI, and 2.46 for ReQuest-WSO. CONCLUSION: Even individuals without evidence of GERD may experience some mild symptoms that are commonly ascribed to GERD. GERD symptom thresholds derived in this study can be used to define the global symptom relief in patients with GERD.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it