Gastroparesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastroparesis (GP) patients suffer from recurrent symptoms of nausea, vomiting, early satiety, and abdominal pain. The impact of GP on quality of life (QoL), health care utilization and daily activities is not well understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Part 1: 398 adult patients (≥18 y) with documented GP (symptoms >6 mo) were surveyed to assess QoL and pain using the Short Form 36 and McGill pain questionnaires. Part 2: 491 adult GP patients were surveyed to evaluate employment status, work and daily activities, medication use, physician visits, diagnostic testing, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations related to their GP symptoms. Both protocols received Institutional Review Board approval. RESULTS: Part 1: 250 fully evaluable surveys were returned (63%). The mean age was 46.8 years (range, 18 to 84 y); 78% were women. Mean Short Form 36 scores for mental health (56.9) and social functioning (68.1) were analogous to scores for patients with serious chronic medical disorders and depression. Pain scores were lower in patients with idiopathic GP compared with diabetic GP. Part 2: 228 evaluable surveys were analyzed (58.3% response rate). The mean age was 49.6 (19 to 86 y); 77.2% were women. GP symptoms reduced daily activities in 67.5% and lowered annual income in 28.5%. In total, 11% were disabled due to GP symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: GP reduces patients' QoL and places a significant financial burden on the health care system. Treatment strategies for GP patients should be broad based and incorporate pain management, psychological evaluation and management, and strategies to improve overall well-being with a return to work and daily activities.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".