A256 GLOBAL INCIDENCE OF ACUTE PANCREATITIS THROUGH TIME: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a globally significant disease. The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review of population-based cohort studies that explore the changing global and temporal incidence of AP. We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE (1946 onward) and EMBASE (1974 onward) up to 2018, to identify population-based studies reporting the incidence of AP with at least five temporal values. Studies reporting the incidence of the first occurrence of AP were examined separately from studies reporting incidence of first and recurrent occurrence of AP. Two teams of authors independently assessed abstracts to identify applicable papers for full-text review and data extraction. Temporal incidence data were summarized in a choropleth map to illustrate global differences in the incidence of AP over time. We identified 38 studies reporting the temporal incidence of AP (Table 1). The incidence of AP is increasing over time in most countries in North America (e.g., USA: 43.3 to 85.6 per 100,000; 1985–2012), Europe (Norway: 5.5 to 15.9 per 100,000; 1996–2006), and Oceania (New Zealand: 41.3 to 76.8 per 100,000; 2006–2014). In contrast, the incidence of AP varied in Asia with increasing incidence in China (30.5 to 39.2 per 100,000; 2009–2014) and stable incidence in Vietnam (36.2 to 34.3 per 100,000; 2000–2009). This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of the global incidence of AP over the last 60 years. The incidence of AP is increasing over time in most countries. However, the reason for rising incidence is likely multifactorial relating to the changing standards of diagnosis, geographic variation in risk factors for AP, and differences in the surveillance systems for AP. Nonetheless, the overall trend of increasing incidence of AP highlights the increasing burden of AP on global health systems. Acute Pancreatitis Incidence Acute Pancreatitis Incidence None
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".