MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2792946126 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.018

A17 LINEAR GROWTH IMPAIRMENT IN CANADIAN CHILDREN PRESENTING WITH NEW ONSET IBD: A MULTI-CENTRE INCEPTION COHORT STUDY

2018· article· en· W2792946126 on OpenAlexaffabout
T D Walters, David R. Mack, Hien Q. Huynh, Jennifer deBruyn, Kevan Jacobson, Anthony Otley, C Deslandres, Mary Sherlock, Ernest G. Seidman, Kevin Bax, Jeffrey Critch, Peter Church, Eric I. Benchimol, Eytan Wine, Sally Lawrence, Johan Van Limbergen, Prévost Jantchou, Matthew Carroll, Anne M. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioMemorial University of NewfoundlandWestern UniversityUniversity of OttawaMcGill University Health CentreMcMaster Children's HospitalDalhousie UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of ManitobaBC Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of AlbertaHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohortMedicinePediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An important target in the management of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is normal linear growth and pubertal development. Greater awareness of IBD and more effective therapies are anticipated to reduce the prevalence of linear growth impairment as a complication of chronic intestinal inflammation. To evaluate the current magnitude of linear growth impairment at diagnosis in pediatric Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Since April 2014, the Canadian Children IBD Network (CIDsCANN) inception cohort study prospectively enrolled patients aged </= 17 years, presenting to 12 academic centers across Canada. Recommended assessment of linear growth at presentation includes height measurement, pubertal staging, ascertainment of pre-illness heights and mid-parental height (MPH) calculation. All growth parameters are standardized utilizing the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) 2000 reference tables. ‘Deficit height z-score’ was calculated using the formula: ‘Predicted Height z-score’ minus ‘Actual Height z-score’. Among the initial 800 participants (58% male; CD: 59%, UC: 30%, IBD-unclassified: 11%), median age at presentation was similar for the three disease sub-categories (12.9 yrs; IQR 10.8–15.0), but duration of symptoms prior to diagnosis was significantly longer in CD (5 months, IQR 3–12 months) vs. UC (3 months, IQR 1–6 months) (p<0.001). Macroscopic disease location based on Paris classification for UC was: 70% E4; 12% E3; 16 % E2 and for CD was: 58% L3; 23% L2; 18% L1. Linear growth impairment, based on historical growth parameters, occurred in 21% of CD patients (8% as the main presenting feature), and 3% of UC patients (but none as the main presenting feature). Predicted height z-scores (based on MPH) were normally distributed (mean 0.07, SD 0.8) with no difference noted between CD and UC patients. As shown in Table, the UC cohort had normal height at diagnosis, but in the CD cohort height was reduced compared to both the healthy population and predicted values. This was especially especially prominant among younger vs. older CD patients (p=0.05), despite similar symptom duration (median 5 months) prior to diagnosis (Table). Males demonstrated a greater deficit than females. Linear growth impairment still occurs prior to the recognition of Crohn’s disease in young patients, but its magnitude is less than in previous eras. Deficit in Height Z-score based on the Mid-Parental Height calculation appears a useful metric in quantifying linear growth impairment. CH.I.L.D Foundation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→