A population-based study of fatigue and sleep difficulties in inflammatory bowel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been little investigation of fatigue, a common symptom in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study was to evaluate fatigue more comprehensively, considering relationships with psychological and biological factors simultaneously in a population-based IBD community sample. METHODS: Manitoba IBD Cohort Study participants (n = 318; 51% Crohn's disease [CD]) were assessed by survey, interview, and blood sample. Fatigue, sleep quality, daytime drowsiness, stress, psychological distress, and quality of life were measured with validated scales. Hemoglobin (Hg) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were also obtained. Differences were tested across disease activity and disease subtype. RESULTS: Elevated CRP was found for 23% of the sample and 12% were anemic; 46% had active disease. Overall, 72% of those with active and 30% with inactive disease reached clinical thresholds for fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; P < 0.001); 77% and 49% of those with active or inactive disease, respectively, experienced poor sleep (P < 0.001). There were few differences between those with CD and ulcerative colitis (UC) on the factors assessed, except for higher CRP levels in CD (mean 8.8 versus 5.3, P < 0.02). Multiple logistic regression analyses found that elevated fatigue was associated with active disease (odds ratio [OR] 4.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-7.8), poor sleep quality (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.9-8.6), and perceived stress (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.2-8.1), but not with hours of sleep, Hg, or CRP. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue and poor sleep are not only highly prevalent in active disease, but both are still significant concerns for many with inactive disease. Psychological factors are associated with fatigue in IBD in addition to disease and sleep considerations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".