P786 Mode of delivery and risk of inflammatory bowel disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Recent evidence suggests that early life exposures known to influence microbiome development (eg, breastfeeding, exposure to antibiotics, etc.) may also affect the risk of developing IBD. Mode of delivery is one of the major factors impacting the newborn’s microbiome development, and specifically, Caesarean-section (C-section), which has been associated with altered colonisation of commensal gut flora, is thought to predispose to immune-mediated diseases later in life. The relation between C-section and IBD is not yet well characterised with different studies showing conflicting results. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of IBD, Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) according to mode of delivery (C-section vs. vaginal delivery). A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Scopus. Case–control and cohort studies were included. The primary outcome was the risk of IBD in individuals delivered vaginally compared with those born by C-section. Secondary outcomes were UC and CD risk according to mode of delivery and IBD risk in individuals born by emergent compared with elective C-section. Heterogeneity between the studies was assessed. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots and Egger’s test. Study’s quality was characterised using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Analysis was conducted using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis v2. 11 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, of which 6 were population-based. All the studies were from developed countries (UK, Denmark, Australia, USA, Germany, Canada, Scotland, Norway, Sweden) and 5 were limited to paediatric age. No publication bias was detected. Overall, the total number of IBD patients was 15,292 that were compared with 6,981,080 controls. When looking at all studies together, C-section was not associated with a higher risk of IBD (OR 1.02 [95% CI 0.84–1.24], p = 0.86). We observed a trend towards an increased risk for CD in individuals born by C-section compared with those vaginally delivered, without significant results (OR 1.39 [95% CI 0.99–1.71], p = 0.06). No association was found between C-section and UC (OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.76–1.30], p = 0.94). No differences were found in IBD risk when comparing elective and emergent C-section (OR 1.05, [95% CI 0.59–1.87], p = 0.87). Overall, the risk of developing IBD was not affected by mode of delivery. Likewise, the setting of C-section (emergent vs. elective) did not affect IBD risk. Individuals born by C-section may have a higher risk for CD.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,013 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».