Increasing Prevalence and Direct Health Care Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Among Adults: A Population-Based Study From a Western Canadian Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to calculate the prevalence and estimate the direct health care costs of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and test if trends in the prevalence and direct health care costs of IBD increased over two decades in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using administrative health data of Saskatchewan between 1999/2000 and 2016/2017 fiscal years. A validated case definition was used to identify prevalent IBD cases. Direct health care costs were estimated in 2013/2014 Canadian dollars. Generalized linear models with generalized estimating equations tested the trend. Annual prevalence rates and direct health care costs were estimated along with their 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: In 2016/2017, 6468 IBD cases were observed in our cohort; Crohn's disease: 3663 (56.6%), ulcerative colitis: 2805 (43.4%). The prevalence of IBD increased from 341/100,000 (95%CI 340 to 341) in 1999/2000 to 664/100,000 (95%CI 663 to 665) population in 2016/2017, resulting in a 3.3% (95%CI 2.4 to 4.3) average annual increase. The estimated average health care cost for each IBD patient increased from $1879 (95%CI 1686 to 2093) in 1999/2000 to $7185 (95%CI 6733 to 7668) in 2016/2017, corresponding to an average annual increase of 9.5% (95%CI 8.9 to 10.1). CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide relevant information and analysis on the burden of IBD in Saskatchewan. The evidence of the constant increasing prevalence and health care cost trends of IBD needs to be recognized by health care decision-makers to promote cost-effective health care policies at provincial and national levels and respond to the needs of patients living with IBD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".