The Prevalence of Long Bone Fractures in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The association of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with decreased bone mineral density is well recognized. In the adult population, up to 50% of IBD patients are reported to have osteopenia, correlating with an increase in the incidence of fractures as compared with controls. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of fractures in a pediatric population with IBD as compared with healthy sibling controls (SC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The families of 209 patients with IBD were sent a questionnaire asking them to compare their children with IBD to a healthy sibling (non-IBD). RESULTS: Surveys were returned by 132 of the 209 families (63%). The sample characteristics of this sample closely resembled the overall clinic population for age (mean 14.3 vs 14.7 years), gender (53% vs 59% male) and diagnosis (58.1 vs 57.8 Crohn disease). Completed surveys described 263 children. Of the 132 with IBD 73 (55%) had Crohn disease, 52 (39%) had ulcerative colitis and 7 (6%) had indeterminate colitis. There were 76/132 males (age range, 4-18 years) with IBD and 64/131 males (age range, 1-26 years) in the sibling controls. Mean ages of the IBD sample 14.3 +/-.3 was compared with 13.9 +/- in SC. Of the total group, 73/263 (28%) reported ever having a fracture, 44 (60%) were siblings (SC), and 29 (40%) had IBD. Of the 29 children with IBD, 17 (59%) reported having a fracture after diagnosis including 2 who had fractures both before and after diagnosis. The total number of fractures reported was 96 (55 SC:41 IBD). CONCLUSION: In this survey, we found no statistically significant difference in the prevalence of fracture in IBD patients compared with their normal siblings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".