The Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) in H. pylori-Positive and -Negative Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The presence of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection can influence gastric acid production. While both gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and H. pylori are highly prevalent in the Saudi Arabian population, the relationship between these two conditions remains uncertain. This study aims to assess the association between GERD and H. pylori. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study which included patients who underwent endoscopy with gastric biopsy to test for H. pylori. H. pylori status was assessed using histopathology. The GERD-Q questionnaire was used to ascertain the presence of GERD. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the relationship between H. pylori and GERD. RESULTS: A total of 352 participants were included, with a mean age of 45 years (±14.7) and 58% of them being female. 148 participants (42%) tested positive for H. pylori. 59 (39.9%) had GERD. GERD was identified in 39.9% of the H. pylori-positive group and 37.3% of the H. pylori-negative group. H. pylori was not significantly associated with GERD in the multivariate analysis (P = 0.726, OR = 1.089, 95% CI: 0.675 - 1.759). CONCLUSION: There was no association between H. pylori infection and GERD in this Saudi Arabian population.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".