Natural history of gastroesophageal reflux in infancy: new data from a prospective cohort.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) is common in infants. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is defined as GER leading to troublesome symptoms that affect daily functioning and/or complications. This study is aimed at determining the prevalence and progression of GER and GERD in a cohort of healthy term infants from birth to 12 months old.Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study including all full-term living neonates born at Besançon Teaching Hospital, France. Parents completed a clinical report form and the Infant Gastroesophageal Reflux Questionnaire-Revised (I-GERQ-R) at 1, 3, 6, 10, and 12 months of age. GER was defined as score ≥1 to the first question with I-GERQ-R score < 16, and GERD as score ≥1 to the first question with I-GERQ-R score ≥ 16. Regurgitation was based on the answer to the first question of the I-GERQ-R as anything coming out of the mouth daily. Results: 157/347 births were included (83 boys). The prevalence of regurgitation at least once a day was 45.7% overall. In total: 72%, 69%, 56%, 18%, and 13% of infants regurgitated at least once a day at 1, 3, 6, 10, and 12 months of age, respectively. Physiological GER affected 53%, 59%, 51%, 16%, and 12% of infants; GERD, 19%, 9%, 5%, 2%, and 2%, respectively. Two risk factors were identified: family history of GER and exposure to passive smoking. Treatment included dietary modification (14%) and pharmacotherapy (5%).Conclusion: Physiological GER peaked at 3 months, GERD at 1 month. Most cases resolved on their own. GER and GERD are very common in the infant’s population and parents should be reassured/educated regarding symptoms, warning signs, and generally favorable prognosis. I-GERQ-R is useful to the clinical screening and follow up for GER and GERD.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 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".