Predicting Outcomes in Pediatric Crohn’s Disease for Management Optimization: Systematic Review and Consensus Statements From the Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease–Ahead Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: A better understanding of prognostic factors within the heterogeneous spectrum of pediatric Crohn's disease (CD) should improve patient management and reduce complications. We aimed to identify evidence-based predictors of outcomes with the goal of optimizing individual patient management. METHODS: A survey of 202 experts in pediatric CD identified and prioritized adverse outcomes to be avoided. A systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis, when possible, was performed to identify clinical studies that investigated predictors of these outcomes. Multiple national and international face-to-face meetings were held to draft consensus statements based on the published evidence. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 27 statements regarding prognostic factors for surgery, complications, chronically active pediatric CD, and hospitalization. Prognostic factors for surgery included CD diagnosis during adolescence, growth impairment, NOD2/CARD15 polymorphisms, disease behavior, and positive anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibody status. Isolated colonic disease was associated with fewer surgeries. Older age at presentation, small bowel disease, serology (anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibody, antiflagellin, and OmpC), NOD2/CARD15 polymorphisms, perianal disease, and ethnicity were risk factors for penetrating (B3) and/or stenotic disease (B2). Male sex, young age at onset, small bowel disease, more active disease, and diagnostic delay may be associated with growth impairment. Malnutrition and higher disease activity were associated with reduced bone density. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based consensus statements offer insight into predictors of poor outcomes in pediatric CD and are valuable when developing treatment algorithms and planning future studies. Targeted longitudinal studies are needed to further characterize prognostic factors in pediatric CD and to evaluate the impact of treatment algorithms tailored to individual patient risk.
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 | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".