Therapeutic efficacy of digital music gastric electrical pacing for refractory functional dyspepsia concomitant with non-erosive reflux disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the clinical efficacy of digital music gastric electrical pacing for refractory functional dyspepsia concomitant with non-erosive reflux disease, and its effects on mental health and life-quality of the patients. Methods According to the Rome Ⅲ criteria and Montreal consensus in diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease, 50 patients with concomitant refractory functional dyspepsia and non-erosive reflux disease were recruited. The clinical efficacy of digital music gastric electrical pacing were evaluated using the score of clinical symptoms before treatment and 15 days after treatment, and the mental health and life-quality of patients were assessed using symptom checklist 90. Results Main symptoms, including upper abdominal pain, abdominal fullness, early satiety, belching, hiccup, nausea, heartburn, acid reflux (daytime), nocturnal acid reflux, loss of appetite and sleep, were significantly improved 15 days after treatment compared with those of pre-treatment, and there were statistically significant differences (all P<0.005). The significant response rate/response rate (efficacy rate) were 59.0%/100.0%, 59.3%/96.3%, 47.0%/94.1%, 61.3%/96.8 %, 86.7%/100.0%, 80.0%/100.0%, 64.3%/92.9%, 73.7%/89.5%, 64.3%/85.7%, 90.0%/90.0%, 36.7%/93.3% respectively. After treatment for 15 days, the overall response rate of symptom relief was 94.4% in patients and the overall significant response rate was 65.7%. The symptom scores of somatization, obsessive-compulsiveness, depression, and anxiety were significantly improved, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.01). Conclusion The clinical efficacy of digital music gastric electrical pacing is significant for refractory functional dyspepsia concomitant with nonerosive reflux disease, and it is expected to be a new option for the treatment of this disease complex. DOI: 10.11855/j.issn.0577-7402.2015.03.08
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".