A26 PEDIATRIC-ONSET INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE INCREASES THE RISK OF VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM: A CANGIEC POPULATION-BASED STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) increases the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients of all ages but the risk of VTE among Canadian children with IBD has not previously been investigated. Aims Report the incidence of VTE and subtypes pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in children with and without IBD. Methods Children diagnosed with IBD <16y were identified from health administrative data in Ontario (2002–2014), Alberta (2007–2015), and Nova Scotia (2002–2012) using validated algorithms and matched by age and sex to children without IBD (1:5 ratio). Validated ICD-10 codes identified hospitalizations for incident VTE (DVT, PE, and sinovenous thrombosis). Province-specific 5-year cumulative incidence per 1000 person-years (PY) of VTEs were pooled using fixed-effects generalized linear mixed models with a Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) within 5 years of diagnosis were pooled using fixed-effects generalized linear mixed models to compare children with and without IBD, and children with Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Results 3127 children with IBD (1826 CD; 1045 UC) were matched to 15,635 children without IBD. The cumulative incidence of VTE within 5 years of IBD diagnosis was 2.8 (95% CI 2.1–3.8) per 1000 PYs compared to 0.13 (95% CI 0.07–0.24) per 1000 PYs in children without IBD (Table). The 5-year cumulative incidences of VTE, DVT, and PE were significantly higher in children with IBD than in children without IBD (VTE: IRR 21.44, 95% CI 10.73–42.82; DVT: IRR 25.15, 95% CI 11.12–56.89; PE: IRR 4.01, 95% CI 1.22–13.18). Compared to UC patients, children with CD were at lower risk of VTE (IRR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29–0.96) and numerically, but not statistically, lower risk of DVT (IRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.30–1.14). Conclusions Although VTEs are relatively rare among children with IBD, these children are at much greater risk than children without IBD. Gastroenterologists caring for these patients should be cognizant of VTE risk and provide appropriate prophylaxis to those at high risk of VTE. Funding Agencies CCC
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".