The 2023 Impact of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Canada: The Influence of Sex and Gender on Canadians Living With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sex (the physical and physiologic effects resulting from having specific combinations of sex chromosomes) and gender (sex-associated behaviours, expectations, identities, and roles) significantly affect the course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and the experience of living with IBD. Sex-influenced physiologic states, like puberty, the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, and andropause/menopause may also impact and be impacted by IBD. While neither Crohn's disease nor ulcerative colitis is commonly considered sex-determined illnesses, the relative incidence of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis between males and females varies over the life cycle. In terms of gender, women tend to use healthcare resources at slightly higher rates than men and are more likely to have fragmented care. Women are more commonly prescribed opioid medications and are less likely than men to undergo colectomy. Women tend to report lower quality of life and have higher indirect costs due to higher rates of disability. Women are also more likely to take on caregiver roles for children with IBD. Women with IBD are more commonly burdened with adverse mental health concerns and having poor mental health has a more profound impact on women than men. Pregnant people with active IBD have higher rates of adverse outcomes in pregnancy, made worse in regions with poor access to IBD specialist care. The majority of individuals with IBD in Canada do not have access to a pregnancy-in-IBD specialist; access to this type of care has been shown to allay fears and increase knowledge among pregnant people 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".