Pregnancy and Live Birth Rates Over Time in Women With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Population-Based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) negatively affects fertility and fecundity. We aimed to determine longitudinal trends in and factors that affect pregnancy rates in women with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). Methods: Women in the University of Manitoba IBD Epidemiology Database aged 15 to 45 were identified between 1992 and 2018 and matched up to 10 non-IBD controls. Pregnancy and live birth rates were compared between women with and without UC or CD stratified by time-period, disease duration and maternal age at conception. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Poisson regression was used to adjust these rates for year of pregnancy, disease duration, maternal age, severity of IBD, and prior IBD-related surgery. Results: Compared to controls, women with UC had lower rates of pregnancies (IRR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82-0.99) and women with CD had lower rates of pregnancies (IRR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.79-0.93) and live births (IRR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75-0.92). Although rates of pregnancies and live births were significantly lower in women with UC and CD compared to controls prior to 2010, there appeared to be no differences between the two groups after 2010. Prior intestinal surgery and active disease at conception appeared to lower pregnancy rates in women with UC and CD, respectively. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that women with IBD have lower pregnancy rates compared to those without IBD, though these differences are no longer evident after 2010. Factors that continue to reduce these rates include prior colectomy and underlying disease activity.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".