The association of coeliac disease and microscopic colitis: a large population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An association between microscopic colitis and coeliac disease (CD) has been suggested in literature; however, population-based data are limited. AIMS: To estimate the degree of association between these two diseases and to identify possible risk factors for disease concomitance. METHODS: A population-based review of all patients diagnosed with CD and microscopic colitis in a large Canadian centre over a 5-year period. Endoscopy and pathology databases were searched to identify all cases of CD and microscopic colitis diagnosed within the Calgary Health Region between 2004 and 2008. Incidence rates were age-standardised and gender-standardised to 2006 Canadian Census data. standardised incidence ratios (SIR) were used to assess disease concomitance. RESULTS: Over 5 years, 763 patients were diagnosed with CD, and 1106 were diagnosed with microscopic colitis. The standardised incidence of CD ranged from 10.4 to 15.7 per 100,000 population. The standardised incidence of microscopic colitis ranged from 16.9 to 26.2 per 100,000 population. Forty patients were diagnosed with both CD and microscopic colitis, 21 of whom were middle aged (40-60 years) females. Within the CD cohort, microscopic colitis occurred at an annual rate of 11.4 per 1000 cases of CD with an overall SIR of 52.7. CONCLUSIONS: There exists a strong association between microscopic colitis and CD with disease concomitance being approximately 50-times that expected in the general population. The concomitant diagnosis of CD and microscopic colitis largely occurs in middle-aged women. Therefore, middle-aged women with CD and diarrhoea as a presenting or persistent symptom should undergo lower endoscopy with biopsies to rule out microscopic colitis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".