The Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort Study: a prospective longitudinal evaluation of the use of complementary and alternative medicine services and products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use over time in a population-based cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: The Manitoba IBD Cohort Study is a longitudinal, population-based study of multiple determinants of health outcomes in an IBD cohort. Participants completed semi-annual surveys, and annual in-person interviews. Enquiries about the use of 12 types of CAM service providers and 13 CAM products, based on items from a national survey, were included at months 0, 12, 30 and 54. RESULTS: Overall, 74% of respondents used a CAM service or product in the 4.5-year period, with approximately 40% using some type of CAM at each time point, and 14% using CAM consistently at every time point. There was a trend for women to use CAM more than men; there was no difference in CAM use between patients with Crohn's disease and those with ulcerative colitis. The most often used CAM services (on average) were massage therapy (30%) and chiropractic (14%), physiotherapy (4%), acupuncture (3.5%) and naturopathy/homeopathy (3.5%). A wide range of CAM products were used, with Lactobacillus acidophilus (8%), fish and other oils (5.5%), glucosamine (4%) and chamomile (3.5%) as the most common. On average, only 18% of consumers used CAM for their IBD, so the majority chose it for other problems. There were no differences in psychological variables between CAM users and non-users. CONCLUSIONS: Those with IBD commonly try CAM, although very few use these approaches regularly over the years. CAM is not usually used by patients with IBD for disease management, but clinicians should be aware that many will test the services and products.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".