MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007499542 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwz047.003

A4 A FRAMEWORK TO STUDY INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE AMONG INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS FROM SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA

2020· article· en· W3007499542 on OpenAlexaffabout
Juan Nicolás Peña-Sánchez, Derek Jennings, Mustafa Andkhoie, Colten Brass, Germain Bukassa-Kazadi, Sharyle Fowler, Michelle Johnson-Jennings, José Diego Marques Santos, Jessica Amankwah Osei, Linda Porter, Rob Porter, Carol-Lynne Quintin, Rhonda Sanderson, Ulrich Teucher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsAssembly of First NationsCrohn's and Colitis CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMedicineHealth carePopulationInflammatory bowel diseaseIncidence (geometry)DiseaseFamily medicineEnvironmental healthEconomic growthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic condition with significant life-threatening disease-related complications and reductions in quality of life if left untreated. Despite available research about IBD in the general population, there is limited-to-no evidence about IBD among Indigenous peoples in Canada and around the world. Aims We aimed to define a collaborative framework, estimate the prevalence and incidence rates of IBD among First Nations in Saskatchewan, Canada, and explore perceptions of IBD among Indigenous peoples in the province. Methods This study began when Indigenous patients shared their health experiences with IBD with research team members. An interdisciplinary research team was formed including Indigenous patient and family advocates (IPFAs, Indigenous patients living with IBD and parents of an Indigenous person with IBD), an IBD gastroenterologist, knowledge users, and Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers. Our research team committed to raise awareness of IBD among Indigenous peoples within Indigenous communities and among health care providers and to advocate for better healthcare and well-being by providing evidence of IBD among Indigenous peoples living with IBD in Saskatchewan. We defined a mixed methodology. The first phase of the study used Saskatchewan administrative health data to estimate the prevalence and incidence rates with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) of IBD among First Nations. The second phase of the study will use a photovoice methodology to gather “the voices” of Indigenous peoples with IBD, encouraging self-interpretation of pictures, engaging their communities, and empowering them with the study findings. Results The IPFAs play a critical role in the project by sharing their experiences and defining the directions of the project, as well as defining our research framework (Figure 1). Preliminary results show that the prevalence of IBD among First Nations in Saskatchewan increased from 66 (95%CI 65–68) per 100,000 population in 1999 to 148 (95%CI 145–151) per 100,000 people in 2015. In contrast, the incidence rates appear to be stable over time, 11/100,000 (95%CI 4–24) in 1999 and 11/100,000 (95%CI 5–20) in 2015. We started recruiting participants for the photovoice study in September 2019. Conclusions This ground-breaking patient-driven study is the first stage to improve health among Indigenous peoples living with IBD in Saskatchewan. This project will generate community-engaged knowledge and expertise to inform the development of an Indigenous IBD framework that could promote better and knowledge-based healthcare for Indigenous peoples with IBD in Canada and worldwide. Funding Agencies CIHRSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation (SHRF) and Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-Oriented Research (SCPOR)

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0150.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207