MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966813581 · doi:10.1038/ajg.2009.302

Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Post-Infectious Irritable Bowel Syndrome

2009· article· en· W1966813581 on OpenAlexaff
Marroon Thabane, Marko Šimunović, Noori Akhtar‐Danesh, John K. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIrritable bowel syndromeInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Acute gastroenteritis (GE) is an important risk factor for the development of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We used observational data from the Walkerton Health Study (WHS) to develop and validate a risk score for post-infectious (PI) IBS. METHODS: Model derivation and validation were based on a split-sample method from a cohort of patients with exposure to GE (n=1,368). Study participants were randomly assigned to the derivation and validation cohorts in a 1:1 ratio. Within the derivation cohort, univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify risk factors associated with IBS. The risk model was then applied to the validation cohort. Overall model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating curve (ROC). The risk score was developed using multivariable regression coefficients obtained from the derivation set and validated in the validation set. Classification and regression tree (CART) modeling was used to determine cutoff values for high, intermediate, and low risk based on the total score. RESULTS: Nine variables were identified as important predictors of IBS (gender, age<60, longer duration of diarrhea, increased stool frequency, abdominal cramping, bloody stools, weight loss, fever, and psychological disorders (anxiety and depression)). The discriminatory power of the risk model based on the area under ROC was 0.70 and was similar in the validation set. The risk score model showed good accuracy in both the derivation and validation sets and was able to distinguish among cohorts at low, intermediate, and high risk for developing PI-IBS. Percentages of patients with PI-IBS in the low, intermediate and high risk were 10, 35, and 60% in the derivation cohort and 17, 36, and 62% in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: A simple risk tool that uses demographics and symptoms of acute GE can predict which patients with acute GE are at risk of developing PI-IBS. This tool may be used clinically to assess risk and to guide treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations59
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207