Low Mortality in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease in Three Regional Centers in England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recent epidemiological studies suggest that mortality rates for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are similar to those of the general population. However, most of this work has been done in referred populations or larger urban centers. We intended to estimate mortality rates for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) in three British district general hospital practices in Wolverhampton, Salisbury, and Swindon. METHODS: Consecutive patients with CD or UC were identified from 1978 to 1986 and followed prospectively. Demographic data, date and cause of death or health status at December 31, 1993 were used to estimate standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Sixty-four deaths occurred in 552 patients (UC 41 of 356; CD 23 of 196). The overall SMRs were 103 [95% confidence interval (CI): 79-140] for UC and 94 (95% CI: 59-140) for CD. The respective SMRs were higher only in the first year after diagnosis at 223 (95% CI: 99-439; p = 0.02) and 229 (74-535; p = 0.056), and even then, most subjects died from non-IBD causes (5 of 13). Nonsurvivors were significantly older than survivors in both UC and CD (p < 0.01). The SMR was also significantly greater during a severe first attack of UC at 310 (95% CI: 84-793; p = 0.04). Patients with perianal or colonic CD had an increased SMR [396 (95% CI: 108-335; p = 0.02) and 164 (95% CI: 82-335; p = 0.02)] respectively, partly related to the older mean age (52 vs 32 yr, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality rates are not increased in IBD compared with the general population. However, older patients may be at increased risk of dying from other causes early in the disease clinical course.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".