Planned Transition of Adolescent Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Results in Higher Remission Rates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of our current transition process on clinical outcomes in adolescent patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). DESIGN AND METHODS: Two groups of patients with IBD diagnosed in pediatric care were compared retrospectively: Group A patients did not attend the transition process, while Group B patients entered the planned transition service. Outcomes at 1-year after transfer to adult care were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with IBD diagnosed under the age of 18 years were identified of whom 35 had Crohn's disease and 10 had ulcerative colitis. Twenty-four patients were in Group A (without transition), and 21 patients in Group B (with at least one planned transition visit). Mean age at diagnosis was 15.1 ± 2.2 and 13.7 ± 3.0 years (p = 0.086), respectively. There were no significant differences in disease duration before transfer, Montreal classification at diagnosis, body mass index, anti-TNF therapy usage, and disease status at transfer between the two groups. A significantly higher number of Group B patients were in remission at 12 months after transfer when compared to patients in Group A (11 vs. 18, respectively, p = 0.037). There was a significant difference between groups regarding the number of scheduled visits within the examined period (9 vs. 16, p = 0.011, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Planned transition visits resulted in higher disease remission rate at 1-year follow-up after transfer from pediatric to adult health care system in adolescent patients with IBD. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Well-established transition programs in IBD are needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".