Dyspepsia - The Indian perspective: A cross sectional study on demographics and treatment patterns of Dyspepsia from across India (Power 1.0 study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dyspepsia includes a spectrum of symptoms ranging from epigastric pain and early satiety to postprandial fullness. The worldwide prevalence of dyspepsia is 20-30%. It is slightly higher in the Western population and occurs more frequently among women. While the precise prevalence of dyspepsia in India is not available, different studies estimate that it affects 7.6-49% of the Indian population. Through our current study, we wanted to understand the demographics, clinical profile, patient presentation, and management in India. We also wanted to document the pattern of use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and patient satisfaction with PPIs in Indian patients with dyspepsia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pan-India, multi-centric, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based, noninterventional, observational study was conducted between February and October 2021 in patients >18 years of age with a clinical diagnosis of any form of dyspepsia. Descriptive statistics were used for categorical variables, and between-group comparisons were made using Fischer's exact test, with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance. RESULTS: A total of 3,739 patients from across 29 states of India participated in the study. Most of the patients were male (70.8%) and were from urban areas (56.8%). The highest percentage of patients were aged 31-40 (33.8%), and most patients (60.2%) had dyspepsia for a duration of 6-12 months. Patients with functional dyspepsia (FD) (78.5%) were significantly higher compared to organic dyspepsia (OD) (21.5%) (p < 0.001). The most frequent presenting symptoms were epigastric pain, nausea, vomiting, and heartburn. A quarter (25.6%) of the dyspepsia patients were associated with various comorbid conditions, of which diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and irritable bowel syndrome are the most common ones. A total of 619 patients in the study were on concomitant medications, of which the most common were antidiabetic drugs (271/619, 43.8%). Rabeprazole was the most frequently used PPI (2467/3739, 66.0%) among the study participants. The patient satisfaction analysis showed that, overall, patients were satisfied with PPIs, as most patients (~80%) agreed to almost all questions. The analysis for individual PPIs showed the highest "agree" responses in the rabeprazole group for almost all questions (12 of 13). Around 86.4% of patients on rabeprazole agreed with "immediate relief from acidity," 84.9% for "gives me complete relief," and 85.9% for "relief from nighttime acidity symptoms." CONCLUSION: Our study involving over 3,700 Indian patients with Dyspepsia adds to the growing knowledge of dyspepsia in India. Dyspepsia is more prevalent in males and in the 31-50 age group. FD is the most common form. Overall, patients were satisfied with PPIs in dyspepsia management in India. Patients on rabeprazole showed higher levels of medication adherence, satisfaction with symptom relief, convenience of therapy, and safety compared to patients on other PPIs. Against the backdrop of a paucity of reliable data about dyspepsia in India, our study results provide valuable insights into Dyspepsia and its management in an Indian setting.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".