Depression and Anxiety in Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Previous studies have implicated the co-existence of psychological disorders and primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). However, the exact magnitude of the prevalence and related score of depression and anxiety in patients with PBC are still unclear. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> We aimed to assess the prevalence and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores for depression and anxiety in patients with PBC. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> A comprehensive search of studies published before June 10, 2020 was performed in databases of PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Methodological quality was assessed based on the Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Twelve studies were identified, representing 933 patients with PBC. Pooled prevalence estimates were 27.59% (95% CI 16.75%-38.43%) for depression and 19.87% (95% CI 14.12%-25.62%) for anxiety. The scores of HADS-D and HADS-A were 5.60 (95% CI 4.67-6.52) and 6.56 (95% CI 4.89-8.23) among PBC suffers, respectively. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that depression and anxiety are prevalent in PBC patients. Physicians should be vigilant for psychiatric symptoms among PBC suffers and provide appropriate interventions for them. Exploration of underlying mechanisms and interactions in the future investigations is warranted. </sec>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".