Review: Epidemiology of <i>Helicobacter pylori</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review summarizes the recent knowledge on the epidemiology of Helicobacter pylori and the potential modes of transmission. In addition to English language publications, the authors have included original full-text publications from Russia and Latin America published in the original languages. High H pylori prevalence has been reported in Russia, Jordan, Iran, China, and Latin American countries as well as in Arctic populations in Canada. Indigenous inhabitants in the Arctic were found to be infected substantially more frequently than non-indigenous inhabitants. In Amsterdam, the Netherlands, the ethnic minority groups were at a significantly higher risk of being H pylori seropositive compared to the Dutch population. For the first time, data on the prevalence from Armenia have been published indicating 41.5% H pylori prevalence. Convincing evidence on the decline of H pylori prevalence in Southeast Hungary and Taiwan was published. A study from Chile suggested high infection rates in newborns during the first month after birth. Two meta-analyses covered the potential correlation between H pylori and periodontal diseases, therefore addressing the potential oro-oral transmission rates. Periodontal disease was found to be more prevalent in H pylori-infected subjects. Other studies addressed the potential role of drinking water and food products as well as socioeconomic factors in transmitting the infection. Several studies in Asia addressed annual reinfection rates of H pylori, ranging from 1.5% in China to 3.1% in Korea. Finally, a review was published on the current evidence and future perspective of analysing H pylori in ancient human remains by a metagenomic approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".