TO STUDY THE PREVALENCE AND RISK FACTORS OF HEMORRHOIDS IN TERTIARY CARE CENTER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The study aims to recognize the incidence and risk factors of hemorrhoids among patients in a tertiary care center. Methods: The demographic details from all the patients were noted. Their dietary habits, bowel habits, amount of physical activity, smoking and alcohol use were noted in detail. Results: The age group above 40 years (72.45%), male gender (65.6%), low educational level (52.48%), lower socioeconomic status (66.75%), family history of hemorrhoids (59.34%), constipation (79.89%), longer duration of stay in the toilet for evacuation (62.25%), chronic cough (55.65%) majorly promotes the risk of development of hemorrhoids. In addition major factors were: no daily consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, daily intake of spicy foods, inadequate intake of water, sedentary lifestyles, and high body mass index. Conclusion: Healthcare providers should increase the information of people regarding the risk factors that prone people to hemorrhoids. By educating the public about the risk factors of hemorrhoids and their preventive techniques, hemorrhoids incidence could be brought down.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".