[Association of psychosocial factors and platelet 5-HT with peptic ulcer].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To scrutinize the association of psychosocial factors especially emotional factors with peptic ulcer. METHODS: Eighty-nine peptic ulcer patients and 50 normal controls were investigated by means of questionnaires for personality, alexithymia, social support, life events, and their platelet 5-HT levels were determined. RESULTS: By comparison with normal controls, the peptic ulcer patients had: (1) higher scores on the subscales such as Hs, D, Pt, Sc and Hy of personality; (2) Higher scores on HAMA, HAMD and Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS); (3) Significantly lower platelet 5-HT concentration. And in the ulcer patients who were not infected with HP (called HP negative), the area of their ulcer was found to have a positive correlation with HAMA and TAS scores (r=0.74, P<0.01; r=0.45, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: (1) There was a correlation between the onset of peptic ulcer and personality or manner of emotional expression. (2) There may be two subtypes of ulcer patients: one of it may be due to HP infection and the other may be more closely associated with negative emotion and manner of emotional expression; for the latter one, anxiolytics deserve to be included in the routine treatments.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".