MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921692436 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz006.140

A141 PREVALENCE OF CELIAC DISEASE IN PATIENTS WITH PRIMARY BILIARY CHOLANGITIS.

2019· article· en· W2921692436 on OpenAlexaff
Kashi Callichurn, Lena Cvetkovic, Amélie Therrien, Catherine Vincent, Mickaël Bouin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyCohortAutoimmune hepatitisLiver biopsyLiver diseaseDiseasePrimary sclerosing cholangitisBiliary diseaseBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is an autoimmune chronic liver disease, affecting mostly women. PBC frequently coexists with other autoimmune diseases, including celiac disease (CD). Although the prevalence of CD is high among cohorts with PBC, few studies have directly compared this prevalence to those among individuals with other liver diseases (OLD). To compare the prevalence of CD between a cohort with PBC and a cohort with OLD. Retrospective study from 2013 to 2016. All consecutive patients with an anti-transglutaminase assay requested by a hepatologist and a diagnosis of chronic liver disease were included. The diagnosis of CD had to be confirmed histologically by a small intestinal biopsy. The groups were compared by chi-square tests. We included 399 patients (53.1 years SD 14.0, 54.1% women), including 51 patients with PBC and 348 patients with OLD. The PBC and OLD groups were different for the gender (90.2% vs. 48.9% women, p <0.0001). The prevalence of CD was higher in the group with PBC compared to the group with OLD (11.8 vs 2.9%, p <0.003). In the OLD group, the prevalence of CD was comparable regardless of the etiologic subgroup (NASH 2.7% vs. ROH 4.3%, vs viral 1.5% vs other autoimmune liver diseases 3.3%). The most common reasons for CD screening among PBC patients were the presence of PBC (33.3%) and the etiologic assessment of liver disease (31.4%), whereas for patients with OLD, it was etiologic assessment of liver disease (39.1%) or cytolysis (25.6%). The presence of gastrointestinal symptoms was comparable between PBC and OLD groups (31.4 vs 29.6%, NS). There is a higher prevalence of CD in the PBC group compared to the other liver diseases group. 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 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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207