Old Age at Diagnosis Is Associated With Favorable Outcomes in Korean Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite the rising incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Asian populations, data regarding clinical characteristics of patients in Asia based on age at diagnosis are relatively sparse. The aim of this study was to compare clinical characteristics based on the age at diagnosis according to the Montreal Classification in Korean IBD patients. METHODS: We recruited consecutive patients with IBD at two tertiary hospitals and retrospectively reviewed their medical information. Patients were divided into three groups according to their age at diagnosis: youth (<17 years), young adult (17-40 years), and middle-old (>40 years). The main clinical characteristics for comparison were the achievement of a remission state at the last follow-up visit, cumulative rate of surgery, and cumulative use of immunomodulators and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα) blockers during the follow-up period. RESULTS: In total, 346 IBD patients were included (Crohn's disease [CD] 146 and ulcerative colitis 200; 36 youth, 202 young adult, and 113 middle-old). The middle-old group with CD was characterized by a predominance of uncomplicated behavior (P=0.013) and a lower frequency of perianal disease (P=0.009). The middle-old group was associated more with a less aggressive disease course than the younger group, as shown by more frequent remission (P=0.004), being less likely to undergo surgery (P<0.001), and lower cumulative use of immunomodulators and TNFα blockers (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Age at diagnosis according to the Montreal Classification is an important prognostic factor for Korean IBD patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".