Robust Association Between Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the link between inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and depression is well accepted, less is known about the relationship between IBD and anxiety disorders and factors associated with anxiety among those with IBD. METHODS: Data were derived from the nationally representative 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health. The survey response rate was 68.9%. Two sets of analyses were undertaken. First, a series of logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the odd ratios of generalized anxiety disorder among those with IBD compared with those without (n = 22,522). The fully adjusted model controlled for sociodemographics, depression, substance abuse/dependence, pain, and adverse childhood experiences. Second, among those with IBD (n = 269), significant correlates of generalized anxiety disorder were identified using logistic regression. The presence of generalized anxiety disorder was determined using the WHO-CIDI lifetime criteria, and IBD was assessed by a self-reported health professional diagnosis. RESULTS: Individuals with IBD had over twice the odds of anxiety compared with those without IBD, even when controlling for a range of potential explanatory factors (odds ratio = 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-3.16). Controlling for chronic pain and childhood adversities attenuate the relationship the most. Among those with IBD, a history of childhood sexual abuse, female gender, and chronic pain are the strongest correlates of anxiety. Those with Crohn's and ulcerative colitis were equally vulnerable to generalized anxiety disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that IBD is robustly related to generalized anxiety disorder. Health care professionals should be aware of the increased prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder among their patients with IBD, particularly women, those in chronic pain, and those with a history of childhood sexual abuse.
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".