MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3133906030 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.180

A182 INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE AMONG SENIORS IN SASKATCHEWAN

2021· article· en· W3133906030 on OpenAlexaffabout
A Shahmoradi, Sharyle Fowler, Juan Nicolás Peña-Sánchez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseaseUlcerative colitisOdds ratioInternal medicineLogistic regressionConfidence intervalConfoundingDiseaseCrohn's diseaseRetrospective cohort studyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory condition comprised of two major disorders: ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD).The age of onset for many patients with UC and CD is between 15 and 30 years, with a second peak between 50 and 80 years of age. Aims We aim to determine if there are differences in disease characteristics, outcomes, and IBD-related health care utilization between elderly patients with IBD diagnosed at a young age compared to those diagnosed later in life. Methods A retrospective chart review of elderly (age ≥ 60 years) patients with IBD was conducted.Patients aged ≥ 60 years who were seen at the Saskatchewan Multidisciplinary IBD Clinic at the Royal University Hospital from 2012 to 2020 were included. Information on demographics, disease characteristics, and access to IBD-related health care was collected. Patients were divided in two groups according to age of diagnosis: <60 and ≥ 60 years. Chi-squares were used to compare the groups. Charts with missing data were omitted in the final analysis. Three patients with indeterminant colitis were excluded from the analyses. Logistic regression models were built to obtain odds ratios (OR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) and considering potential confounders. Results In total, 264 patients were included in the study; 210(79.5%) diagnosed <60 and 54(20.5%) ≥ 60. The mean age of diagnosis was 47.21(SD=16.18), [<60=41.69(SD=13.25), ≥60=68.00(SD=6.264)].Cross tabulation (Table 2) of age of diagnosis and patient’s characteristics (sex, IBD type, and clinical remission at last visit, current use of biologics and steroids) confirmed lack of inter-variable significance. However, in the same analysis individuals diagnosed ≥ 60 were more likely to be on 5-ASA therapy compared to their counterparts diagnosed before the age of 60. Logistic regression model results demonstrated that: Patients diagnosed ≥ 60 years were 2.06 (1.12–3.80, 95% CI) times more likely to be using 5-ASA therapy.Patients in clinical remission were 3.04 (95% CI, 1.65–5.61) times more likely to be using biologic therapy. Conclusions Thus far, the results indicate significant correlation between use of 5-ASA in patients diagnosed age ≥60. In the same cohort, clinical remission was also linked to current use of biologics agents. On further analysis, with data stratification based on type of IBD, the same significance did not hold true, likely associated with low power within the stratified group. Clinical remission with those diagnosed ≥60 years while on biologics treatment, may reflect the specific disease type and inflammatory pathways responsible for second wave of IBD diagnosis in later ages.Patients diagnosed later in life were less likely to have IBD-related hospitalization or surgery, likely a reflection of shorted disease history. Funding Agencies NoneNone

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→