The goal of this cross-sectional study is to evaluate the efficacy of current infection marker (CIM) method for H. pylori detection. The main questions it aims to answer are: * To evaluate the efficacy of CIM method for H. pylori detection compared to rapid urease test(RUT), histopathology, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and urea breath test (UBT) in patients who presented with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage from peptic ulcer, and their sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. * To evaluate the advantages of CIM method for H. pylori detection comparing to RUT, histopathology, PCR, and UBT in patients who presented with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage from peptic ulcer as net reclassification index (NRI). * To study the associated factors in false negative value of H. pylori detection methods with CIM, RUT, histopathology, PCR, and UBT.
Age range
18 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
The efficacy of CIM method for H. pylori detection
Timeframe: Through study completion, an average of 2 years