MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ulcerative colitis in the county of Uppsala 1945–2007

2010· article· en· W115214298 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anders Rönnblom, Sven‐Märten Samuelsson, Anders Ekbom

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUppsala UniversitetAkademiska SjukhusetRegionala Forskningsrådet Uppsala/Örebro
KeywordsUlcerative colitisMedicineColitisGeographyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of ulcerative colitis has increased in many parts of the world during the second part of the twentieth century. In the county of Uppsala in the middle part of Sweden, the epidemiology of ulcerative colitis has been studied during two different time periods, 1945-1964 and 1965-1983. These figures have now been compared to the present day situation, 2005-2007. METHOD: The incidence figures in the two first studies were the results of retrospective studies but the figures from 2005 to 2007 were generated prospectively. The clinical characteristics during 1945-1964 were described according to the Montreal classification and a comparison between the first and third study periods could therefore be done. RESULTS: During the study period, the population of the county increased from 146000 to 323270 inhabitants. The crude incidence of ulcerative colitis increased from 2 to 19.2 new cases per 100000 inhabitants/year. The age distribution was remarkably stable when the first 20 years was compared with the last 3 years (mean age 36 vs. 38.1 and range 2-84 vs. 3-84) except for those below 11 years of age. CONCLUSION: Between 1945 and 2007 the incidence of UC in the County of Uppsala increased from 2 to 19.2 new cases/100000. The increase affected all age groups except those below 11 years of age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207