IBD in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is emerging in the developing world but phenotypic data are limited. We aimed to describe the phenotype, clinical presentation, disease behavior, and treatments of IBD in a large cohort in India. METHODS: All persons presenting to the Asian Institute of Gastroenterology in Hyderabad, India since 2004 with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD were enrolled. The demographic profile at the first visit, family history of IBD, smoking history, time from first symptom onset to diagnosis, use of anti-tuberculousis treatment before IBD-specific treatment, disease phenotype, and medication history were collected by interview and chart review. Disease and family history and treatments used were updated at each follow-up visit. RESULTS: Of 4006 persons enrolled, 59.9% had ulcerative colitis (UC) and the majority were male (60.3%). The median diagnostic delay in both UC and Crohn's disease (CD) was at least 2 years. At the time of diagnosis only 4.5% of CD were smokers and only 3.8% of UC were ex-smokers. Positive family history was uncommon (2.1%). The phenotype of persons with CD included 22.9% with stricturing disease and 9.4% with fistulizing disease. The most common site of disease was ileocolonic (40.9%) and only 2.5% had perineal fistulas. Among those with UC 18.7% had proctitis and 30.3% had pancolitis. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest cohort of persons with IBD reported from Asia. Although there are several demographic differences between persons with IBD from India compared with the West, the phenotypes of the disease are not highly different.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.007 |
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".