MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920246803 · doi:10.1002/ijc.32090

Gallstones and incident colorectal cancer in a large pan‐European cohort study

2018· article· en· W2920246803 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIWorld Cancer Research FundMedical Research CouncilEuropean Social FundInstitut Gustave-RoussyMedical Research Council CanadaDeutsche KrebshilfeMutuelle Générale de l'Education NationaleAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroNordForskVetenskapsrådetCancerfondenWorld Health OrganizationEuropean CommissionCancer Research UKDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleHellenic Health FoundationKræftens BekæmpelseNational Research CouncilLigue Contre le CancerBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerGallstonesCohortInternal medicineCohort studyCancerOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gallstones, a common gastrointestinal condition, can lead to several digestive complications and can result in inflammation. Risk factors for gallstones include obesity, diabetes, smoking and physical inactivity, all of which are known risk factors for colorectal cancer (CRC), as is inflammation. However, it is unclear whether gallstones are a risk factor for CRC. We examined the association between history of gallstones and CRC in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study, a prospective cohort of over half a million participants from ten European countries. History of gallstones was assessed at baseline using a self-reported questionnaire. The analytic cohort included 334,986 participants; a history of gallstones was reported by 3,917 men and 19,836 women, and incident CRC was diagnosed among 1,832 men and 2,178 women (mean follow-up: 13.6 years). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between gallstones and CRC were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models, stratified by sex, study centre and age at recruitment. The models were adjusted for body mass index, diabetes, alcohol intake and physical activity. A positive, marginally significant association was detected between gallstones and CRC among women in multivariable analyses (HR = 1.14, 95%CI 0.99-1.31, p = 0.077). The relationship between gallstones and CRC among men was inverse but not significant (HR = 0.81, 95%CI 0.63-1.04, p = 0.10). Additional adjustment for details of reproductive history or waist circumference yielded minimal changes to the observed associations. Further research is required to confirm the nature of the association between gallstones and CRC by sex.

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.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.327 · 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