MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205822132

pH, healing rate, and symptom relief in patients with GERD.

2000· article· en· W2205822132 on OpenAlexaff
R H Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeartburnGastroenterologyMedicineEsophagusGERDEsophagitisRefluxInternal medicineReflux esophagitisPathologicalPepsinGastric acidPepticProton-pump inhibitorOmeprazoleDiseaseStomachPeptic ulcerChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gastroesophageal reflux symptoms are common and occur in all of us from time to time. In others, reflux may be associated with ulcerative esophagitis. The symptoms may be aggravated by large meals, coffee, smoking and position. Physiological and pathological reflux can be separated by the frequency and duration of the exposure of the lower esophagus to acid. Pathological reflux results in symptoms and also esophagitis and ulceration in some patients. Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is considered to result from a disorder of motility in the esophagus, gastric acid and peptic activity are deemed pivotal to the initiation and continuation of the esophageal damage and the development of symptoms. Acid exposure in the esophagus is normally less than 4 percent of the 24 hours with a pH below 4. An increase over 4 percent of the time with a pH less than 4 is considered pathological. Hence, antisecretory drugs have become the principle approach to the treatment of reflux symptoms and esophagitis since they reduce the acidity, of gastric juice and the activity of pepsin. Importantly, they also reduce the volume of gastric juice available for reflux into the esophagus. There is a clear relationship between the degree and duration of acid suppression and the relief of heartburn and healing of esophagitis. Pharmacodynamic studies with different dose regimens of the H2-receptor antagonists and the proton pump inhibitors show a difference in the degree and duration of the antisecretory effect, and this correlates closely with the results of clinical trials with respect to the healing of esophagitis and the relief of symptoms. Proton pump inhibitors achieve healing rates by week four, which are not achieved by H2-receptor antagonists even after 12 weeks of treatment. The advantage of proton pump inhibitors over H2-receptor antagonists is due to the greater degree, longer duration of effect and more complete inhibition of acid secretion that maintains intragastric pH above 4 for a maximal duration. Although there is no significant difference between proton pump inhibitors with respect to healing of esophagitis, symptom relief occurs earlier with lansoprazole than omeprazole, and this is probably due to the greater oral bioavailability and faster onset of action of lansoprazole when compared to omeprazole.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations60
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGastroesophageal reflux and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207