Systematic review with meta‐analysis: Time to diagnosis and the impact of delayed diagnosis on clinical outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of diagnostic delay on the clinical course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains uncertain. AIM: To perform a systematic review of time to diagnosis and the impact of delayed diagnosis on clinical outcomes in Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We searched EMBASE and Medline from inception to 30th November 2022 for studies reporting diagnostic interval, from symptom onset to IBD diagnosis. We calculated the median, interquartile range (IQR) and pooled weighted median, of median diagnostic intervals of eligible studies. We defined delayed diagnosis as individuals above the 75th centile of longest time to diagnosis in each study. Using random effects meta-analysis, we pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for studies reporting clinical outcomes, according to delayed diagnosis. RESULTS: One hundred and one studies representing 112,194 patients with IBD (CD = 59,359; UC = 52,835) met inclusion criteria. The median of median times to diagnosis was 8.0 (IQR: 5.0-15.2) and 3.7 months (IQR: 2.0-6.7) in CD and UC, respectively. In high-income countries, this was 6.2 (IQR: 5.0-12.3) and 3.2 months (IQR: 2.2-5.3), compared with 11.7 (IQR: 8.3-18.0) and 7.8 months (IQR: 5.2-21.8) in low-middle-income, countries, for CD and UC respectively. The pooled weighted median was 7.0 (95% CI: 3.0-26.4) and 4.6 (95% CI: 1.0-96.0) months, for CD and UC respectively. Eleven studies, representing 6164 patients (CD = 4858; UC = 1306), were included in the meta-analysis that examined the impact of diagnostic delay on clinical outcomes. In CD, delayed diagnosis was associated with higher odds of stricturing (OR = 1.88; CI: 1.35-2.62), penetrating disease (OR = 1.64; CI: 1.21-2.20) and intestinal surgery (OR = 2.24; CI: 1.57-3.19). In UC, delayed diagnosis was associated with higher odds of colectomy (OR = 4.13; CI: 1.04-16.40). CONCLUSION: Delayed diagnosis is associated with disease progression in CD, and intestinal surgery in both CD and UC. Strategies are needed to achieve earlier diagnosis of 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 | 0.027 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.049 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".