Effectiveness of eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori infection in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori ( H. pylori ) eradication depends on the treatment protocol. This study investigates the H. pylori eradication rate in Africa using the best available evidence from databases. Methods Databases were searched and results were pooled together. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using I 2 test statistics. Stata version 13 software was employed to compute the pooled eradication rate. In the subgroup analysis comparison, the finding is considered significant when the confidence intervals did not overlap. Results Twenty-two studies from 9 African countries with a total population of 2,163 were included in this study. The pooled eradication rate of H. pylori was 79% (95% CI: 75%-82%), heterogeneity (I 2 = 93.02%). In the subgroup analysis by study design, a higher eradication rate was reported from observational studies (85%, 95% CI: 79%-90%), compared to randomized control trials (77%, 95% CI: 73%-82%); by the duration of therapy, higher eradication rate was reported in 10-days regimen (88%, 95% CI: 84%-92%), compared to 7-days regimen (66%, 95% CI: 55%-77%); by country, the highest eradication rate was found in Ethiopia (90%; 95% CI: 87%-93%) and the lowest eradication rate was reported in Ivory Coast (22.3%; 95% CI:15%-29%); by type of H. pylori test, the highest eradication rate was reported when rapid urease test coupled with histology (88%, 95% CI: 77%-96%), and the lowest eradication rate was reported with histology alone (22.3%; 95% CI:15%-29%). Significant heterogeneity was observed with pooled prevalence (I 2 = 93.02%, P < 0.000). Conclusions In Africa, the first-line therapy showed a variable eradication rate for H. pylori . This study demonstrates the necessity to optimize current H. pylori treatment regimens in each country, taking into account the antibiotic susceptibility. Future RCT studies with standardized regimens are warranted.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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".