MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2017384919 · doi:10.1111/apt.12545

Letter: acute severe ulcerative colitis - should all patients be treated equally? Authors' reply

2013· letter· en· W2017384919 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ruairi Lynch, I. Arnott

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsMedicineUlcerative colitisComorbidityColectomyCohortPopulationInternal medicineExcess mortalityDiseaseMortality rateColitisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We would like to thank Barreiro-de Acosta and Gisbert for their interest in our article.1, 2 The mortality we observed in the elderly acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) population was striking, with a 13-fold and 28-fold increased risk of death in those patients over 60 in 2008 and 2010 respectively.2 This higher mortality in the elderly has been previously reported and was recently summarised in a review of mortality in ulcerative colitis (UC).3 In addition, our finding of increasing mortality in patients with comorbidities might go some way in explaining the higher mortality in elderly patients. It is of note, however, that age and comorbidity have previously been shown to be independent risk factors for mortality in UC.4 A recent report by Charpentier et al. suggests that elderly UC patients' presentations are phenotypically different, with milder disease at presentation, but with earlier progression to colectomy when compared with younger patients;5 could this be relevant in the increased mortality observed? As patients survive longer and present with evermore complex comorbidities, these findings will certainly be relevant in future ASUC management. We would also agree that it is important to at least consider medical rescue therapy in all ASUC patients failing steroid therapy as we have not demonstrated increased short-term mortality when compared with surgery.2 Similar to Nørgård et al.,6 we have demonstrated, in unpublished work from this cohort, that there is no increase in short-term complications in patients who undergo surgery following rescue medical therapy.7 However, it is important to emphasise that our follow-up extends only to hospital discharge. The cornerstone of high-quality care in ASUC continues to be a multidisciplinary approach, with decisions being made promptly and with the appropriate involvement of all members, including patients. The authors' declarations of personal and financial interests are unchanged from those in the original article.2

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0310.034
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→