Maternal Infections That Would Warrant Antibiotic Use Antepartum or Peripartum Are Not a Risk Factor for the Development of IBD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine whether maternal antenatal or perinatal infections (and thereby use of antibiotics) increase the risk of developing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in their offspring. METHODS: The University of Manitoba IBD Epidemiology Database contains records of all Manitobans diagnosed with IBD from 1984 to 2010. Each individual with IBD is matched to 10 controls. Subjects' medical system contacts are identified using a unique deidentified personal health identification number. Individuals born in 1970 and later are linkable to their mothers through a 6-digit family health registration number and cross referencing of mothers' personal health identification number with the child's birth record. We assessed antenatal (30 days and 9 months before delivery) and peripartum (in hospital) maternal infections identified by ICD-8 and ICD-9 codes as a proxy for antibiotic use. RESULTS: Of the 2487 IBD cases born after 1970, 1758 were born in Manitoba, of which 1671 were linkable to mothers (Crohn's disease = 973 and ulcerative colitis = 698). From 1615 families, 10488 matched controls and 1740 siblings were identified. Maternal infections occurred with equal rates in mothers of IBD cases and mothers of controls: within 9 months antepartum, 21.7% versus 23.2% (odds ratio = 0.96 [0.84-1.09]); within 30 days antepartum 11.4% versus 12.4% (odds ratio = 0.97, 0.82-1.14); peripartum 5.5% versus 7.5% (odds ratio = 0.86, 0.68-1.09). There was also no difference in the occurrence of antepartum or peripartum infections among mothers of IBD cases versus unaffected siblings. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal infections (and therefore antibiotic use) in the antepartum and peripartum periods do not affect the risk of development of IBD in offspring.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".