MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922518637 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz006.094

A95 THE IMPACT OF AGE ON NON-COMPLIANCE IN AN AMBULATORY ACADEMIC INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE (IBD) PRACTICE

2019· article· en· W2922518637 on OpenAlexaff
Natasha Bollegala, Tamara Kailas, Jordan LoMonaco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseaseLogistic regressionAmbulatoryCohortInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyFamily historyDiseasePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compliance is critical to the foundation of high quality IBD care. However, many studies rely on self-reported compliance metrics without corroboration. Pediatric to adult transition of care in IBD is a challenging period during which compliance is compromised. To determine the impact of transition age (18–25) on non-compliance. A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from a sample of gastroenterology patients (n=245) recorded in the electronic medical record between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2017. Data was extracted between July 1st, 2017 and August 31st, 2017. Data on patient sex, age at last encounter (separated into 4 categories), age of diagnosis, residential address, disease type, comorbidities, medications, substance use, family history of IBD and markers of non-compliance were collected. Single variable logistic regression was used to determine the impact of age category on compliance. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the likelihood of non-compliance depending on age category while adjusting for baseline characteristics. 245 patients were included and separated (18–25 (n=27), 26–45 (n=109), 46–65 (n=84), >65 (n=25)). 49% had Crohn’s Disease (CD), the mean age at last interaction was 43 +/-15, mean age of IBD diagnosis 31 +/-14, 54% were on biologic therapy, 53% had another non-IBD related comorbidity, 50% reported some form of substance use, 33% had a family history of IBD. The 18–25 group was more likely to not show up for a follow-up visit (33% vs 23% vs 11% vs 12%, p=0.002), not show up to a GP appointment (30% vs 29% vs 25% vs 28%, p=0.0081), arrive late to a GI appointment (56% vs 53% vs 45% vs 48%, p=0.001). They were less likely to cancel a GI appointment in advance (56% vs 66% vs 58% vs 56% p=0.002). Patients aged 18–25 were less likely to volunteer self-discontinuation or inconsistent use of medications, as documented in the physician notes (19% vs 42% vs 43% vs 44%, (p=0.002) and were more likely to have no documented non-compliance in the physician notes (59% vs 41% vs 34% vs 44%, p=0.0002). When focusing on no-show, late arrivals or cancelled visits, a multivariable logistic regression model revealed that all other age categories demonstrated less non-compliance compared to the 18–25 age group (26–45 years OR -1.50 [-2.24,-0.75], 46–65 years OR -2.57 [-3.43,-1.72], >65 years OR -2.62 [-3.61,-1.63]. However, when focusing only on physician documented non-compliance, multivariable logistic regression model did not reveal age as a significant predictor. Transition aged patients 18–25 show more objective forms of non-compliance but are less likely to volunteer their non-compliance in physician interactions, making self-reported compliance metrics unreliable. Department of Medicine, Women’s College Hospital

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207