MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318539624 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac190.0254

P124 Risk of surgery in inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of sex-based differences

2023· review· en· W4318539624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathalie Fogh Rasmussen, Laura Gregersen, Zainab Hikmat, Caroline Moos, A. Green, Vibeke Andersen, Gunvor Iben Madsen, Tine Jess, L J Kjeldsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverticular Disease and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisInflammatory bowel diseaseConfidence intervalInternal medicineHazard ratioMEDLINECINAHLCrohn's diseaseObservational studyCohort studyRelative riskDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic diseases that require routine hospital visits and long-term medical treatment for control of disease activity. Factors such as gender may impact the use and need for healthcare. This systematic review aimed to summarize what is known about sex differences in the risk of bowel surgery in patients with IBD. Methods Embase, Medline, CINAHL, and Web of Science abstracts (January 2012 to January 2022) were searched systematically for observational studies examining associations between sex and risk of bowel surgery. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers using Covidence. Study data were analysed and reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Quality assessment of included studies was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using random effects model meta-analysis for the risk of surgery. In addition, meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the risk of surgery by IBD subtype. The between-study heterogeneity was assessed by calculating the tau-squared and the I-squared statistics. Results Of 9,902 screened articles, 36 studies were included in the review. Most studies were retrospective by design (74.6%). In total, 21 of 36 studies found statistically significant sex-based differences in the risk of bowel surgery for IBD patients. A pooled estimate of HRs for the 13 studies eligible for meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increased risk of bowel surgery among male patients (HR: 1.43 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09;1.86]) compared to female patients. The between-study heterogeneity was high (I2=88.60 [60.60;96.33] and tau2=0.17 [0.03;0.58]) indicating that the pooled estimate should be interpreted with caution. These findings were consistent with the subgroup analysis for ulcerative colitis (HR: 1.78 [1.16;2.72]), but no statistically significant sex difference in the risk of surgery in Crohn’s disease patients was found (HR: 1.26 [0.82;1.93]). Conclusion Sex differences exist in the risk of bowel surgery in IBD patients, and further research is needed to address the underlying causes and consequences of these disparities. It is unclear whether differences are due to underlying biologic mechanisms or are associated with healthcare system related factors such as differential access to care. Surgical procedures or the lack or delay thereof, will have consequences for the further disease trajectory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicDiverticular Disease and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207