The Prevalence of Extraintestinal Diseases in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of the major extraintestinal manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and their relation to disease diagnosis and gender. METHODS: We used the population-based University of Manitoba IBD Database, which includes longitudinal files on all subjects of all health system contacts identified by International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes for visit diagnosis. We extracted a cohort from our database, which included subjects with a known diagnosis of IBD for at least 10 yr. We then determined how many contacts each subject had for each of the following extraintestinal IBD-associated immune diseases: primary sclerosing cholangitis, ankylosing spondylitis, iritis/uveitis, pyoderma gangrenosum, and erythema nodosum. We calculated the prevalence of the extraintestinal diseases using an administrative definition of having at least five health system contacts for the diagnosis in question. This administrative definition has previously been validated in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (UC). RESULTS: A total of 6.2% of patients with IBD had one of six major extraintestinal diseases studied in this report. Only 0.3% of patients had multiple extraintestinal diseases. Iritis/uveitis was the most common extraintestinal disease of all assessed (2.2% of women and 1.1% of men). Iritis/uveitis was more common among women, particularly those with UC (3.8%). Primary sclerosing cholangitis was most common among men with UC (3%). Ankylosing spondylitis was more common among men, and the highest rate was seen among men with Crohn's disease (2.7%). Pyoderma gangrenosum was more common in Crohn's (1.2%) with no gender predilection. Erythema nodosum was similarly present in Crohn's and UC but was more common among women (1.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The associations of immune mediated diseases in extraintestinal sites may help us to further our understanding of IBD pathogenesis, and it may help us in developing a paradigm of disease subsets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".