Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peptic ulcers diseases (PUD) were thought to be caused by a variety of cofactors such as smoking, stress, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) including aspirin. This chapter presents the evidence for the etiological role of Helicobacter pylori in PUD. It considers the prevalence of H. pylori in both duodenal and gastric ulcer patients. The chapter demonstrates the temporal relationship between infection with H. pylori and the development of duodenal ulcer. The clinically relevant evidence for the role of H. pylori comes from intervention trials in which H. pylori was eradicated and recurrence of ulcer disease markedly reduced. The highest risk for ulcer perforation was identified in a cohort of men born between 1900 and 1920. There are only two recommended first-line empiric therapies: non-bismuth quadruple therapy, bismuth quadruple therapy for H. pylori eradication. The potent acid suppressive drugs are potent acid suppressing agents that effectively heal duodenal and gastric ulcers and provide prompt symptom relief.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".