pH values in the pharynx of the patients presenting with compromised nasal breathing of inflammatory and non-inflammatory genesis concomitant with gastroesophageal reflux disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to estimate the influence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) on the pH values in the pharynx and nose. It included 87 patients at the age varying from 18 to 81 years admitted to the Irkutsk-based Railway Clinical Hospital and allocated to four groups. Group 1 was comprised of 25 patients presenting with gastroesophageal reflux disease and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), group 2 consisted of 29 patients with CRS in the absence of GERD, group 3 included 22 patients with nasal septum deformations (NSD) and GERD, group 4 included 11 patients with NSD and motor rhinitis without GERD. The control group was formed from 10 volunteers. pH was measured by the contact method with the use ofEkokhim indicator paper. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was diagnosed following the recommendations of the Montreal consensus. It was shown that pH values in the pharynx of the patients with compromised nasal breathing of any origin in combination with GERD were lower than in the absence of GERD and in the healthy volunteers. The study groups did not differ in terms of pH values in the nasal cavity. It is concluded that pH values 4 or lower may serve as the criterion for pharyngo-laryngeal reflux (PLR) concomitant with HERD while pH 5 occurs more frequently in the patients with compromised nasal breathing of any etiology, regardless of the presence or absence of GERD.Disordered nasal breathing of any genesis in the patients presenting with gastroesophageal reflux disease was associated with the feeling of the lump in the throat, congestion of the respiratory tract and the nose, pain in the ears, cardialgia, and irregular heartbeat. It isrecommended to use pH measurements as a criterion for diagnostics of pharyngo-laryngeal reflux in the patients presenting with gastroesophageal reflux disease.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".