MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2482100659 · doi:10.9790/0853-150778891

Role of Proton Pump Inhibitors on Rapid Urease Test (PYLO DRY) and Histopathological Examination

2016· article· en· W2482100659 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manasa P Kumari, Mahadevaiah Neelambike Sumana, Sunila, Nanadeesh, Ardya Dr

Bibliographic record

VenueIOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRapid urease testUreaseHistopathological examinationTest (biology)ProtonMicrobiologyTraditional medicineInternal medicinePathologyBiochemistryUreaBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to previous studies, if there was a low density of Helicobacter pylori in the stomach, then rapid urease test requires longer time to become positive. Density of Helicobacter pylori could be reduced by recent use of PPIs, hence rapid urease test may require longer reading time as well. The main objective was to determine the effect of PPI on the results of rapid urease test (PYLO DRY) and histopathology. Two antral biopsies were obtained from 35 dyspeptic patients, who underwent gastro intestinal endoscopy from March 2015 to July 2015. An informed consent from all patients and approval from the institutional ethical committee were obtained before proceeding. Antral biopsies were subjected for rapid urease test (PYLO DRY from HALIFAX RESEARCH LABORATORY KOLKATA, INDIA) and histopathologic examinations. The results of Rapid urease test were observed after 1 hour and 24 hours. The histopathologic examinations were used as the gold standard. PYLO DRY was positive in 17.6% ( Eight were positive during histopathological examination. In our study, 24 hours Rapid urease test yeilded higher sensitivity but lower specificity compared to RUT at 1 hour for diagnosis of H.pylori infection in patients who were on PPI.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOSR Journal of Dental and Medical SciencesSame topicHelicobacter pylori-related gastroenterology studiesFrench-language works237,207