Predictive models of disease burden at diagnosis in persons with adult-onset ulcerative colitis using health administrative data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health administrative data is increasingly used to conduct population-based health services research. A major limitation of these data for the study of inflammatory bowel diseases is the absence of detailed clinical information relating to disease burden. We used Ontario health administrative data to develop predictive models of disease burden at diagnosis in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients for future use in population-based studies of incident UC cohorts. METHODS: Through chart review, we characterized macroscopic colitis activity and extent at diagnosis in consecutive adult-onset UC patients diagnosed at The Ottawa Hospital between 2001 and 2012. We linked this cohort to Ontario health administrative data to test the capacity of administrative variables to discriminate different levels of disease activity, disease extent and the disease burden (a composite of disease extent and activity). We modelled outcomes as binary (using logistic regression) and ordinal (using proportional odds regression) variables and performed bootstrap validation of our final models. RESULTS: We tested 20 administrative variables in 587 eligible patients. The logistic model of total disease burden (severe and extensive colitis vs. all other phenotypes) showed moderate discriminatory capacity (optimism-corrected c-statistic value 0.729). Individual models of disease extent and disease activity showed poorer discriminatory capacity (c-statistic value < 0.7 for 3 of 4 models). CONCLUSIONS: Ontario health administrative data may reasonably discriminate levels of total disease burden at diagnosis in adult-onset UC patients. Our models should be externally validated before their widespread application in future population-based studies of incident UC cohorts to adjust for the confounding effects of differences in disease burden.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".