Global Prevalence and Bidirectional Association Between Psoriasis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease—A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Epidemiological studies have established an association between psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease [IBD], i.e. ulcerative colitis [UC] and Crohn's disease [CD], but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was therefore to quantify the prevalences and association between IBD and psoriasis. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched from database inception through April 2018 for studies reporting data on psoriasis among patients with IBD and vice versa. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate, respectively, the prevalences and association between IBD and psoriasis. Data extraction was according to the PRISMA guideline, and quality assessment was made using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The main outcomes were the proportion of psoriasis patients with IBD and vice versa, as well as the association (odds ratio [OR]) of IBD in psoriasis and psoriasis in IBD, respectively. RESULTS: Based on quantitative analysis of 93 studies, the prevalence of psoriasis in CD and in UC was 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1%-4.6%) and 2.8% [95% CI 2.0%-3.8%] respectively. The prevalence of CD and UC was 0.7% [95% CI 0.2%-1.3%] and 0.5% [95% CI 0.3%-0.8%], respectively, among patients with psoriasis. Presence of CD or UC was significantly associated with psoriasis, with OR 2.0 [95% CI 1.4-2.9] and OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.2-2.0], respectively. Presence of psoriasis was significantly associated with CD: OR 2.2 [95% CI 1.6-3.1] and with UC: OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.3-2.0]. CONCLUSIONS: We found significant bidirectional associations between psoriasis and IBD, warranting increased awareness among clinicians in the diagnostic process, especially in children and adolescents with IBD. Last, this study showed an increased frequency of paradoxical psoriasis in patients treated with biologics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.045 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".