MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164098045 · doi:10.3109/00365521.2012.749511

Does hemochromatosis predispose to celiac disease? A study of 29,096 celiac disease patients

2012· article· en· W2164098045 on OpenAlexaff
Jonas F. Ludvigsson, Joseph A. Murray, Paul C. Adams, Maria Elmberg

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCoeliac UKBayer HealthCareIronwood Pharmaceuticals, IncorporatedActoGeniXUS-UK Fulbright Commission
KeywordsMedicineGastroenterologyInternal medicineOdds ratioHemochromatosisHereditary hemochromatosisDiseasePopulationCase-control studyLogistic regressionBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Case reports suggest an association between hereditary hemochromatosis (HH) and celiac disease (CD), but estimates of association are lacking. We estimated the association between HH and CD in a population-based study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Case-control study. We identified 29,096 individuals with biopsy-verified CD (equal to villous atrophy, Marsh stage III) through biopsy reports from all 28 pathology departments in Sweden. We then investigated the risk of a clinical diagnosis of HH in CD and in 144,522 controls matched for age, sex, county and calendar year. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for CD in patients with HH. RESULTS: HH was seen in 30 patients with CD and in 60 matched controls. HH was hence associated with an increased risk of CD (OR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.53-3.45). Restricting HH to individuals with at least two records of HH, the OR for CD was 2.54 (95% CI = 1.57-4.11), with a similar risk estimate when we only looked at HH diagnosed before CD (and matched date in controls) (OR = 2.64; 95% CI = 1.24-5.60). CONCLUSION: HH seems to be associated with an increased risk of CD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207