Think With Your Gut: A Retrospective Analysis on the Effects of Chronic Gastrointestinal Illness and Psychiatric Comorbidities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As mental health awareness increases, healthcare professionals must understand the interplay between chronic gastrointestinal (GI) conditions and psychological well-being, particularly regarding healthcare utilization. This study uniquely aggregates various chronic GI disorders, such as inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, and eosinophilic esophagitis, to examine their impact on depression and anxiety. Methods: Utilizing a retrospective observational design, we analyzed data from 34,876 patients admitted to HCA national hospitals from January 2016 to December 2022. Results: We found that patients with GI conditions and comorbid psychiatric disorders had significantly higher readmission rates and longer hospital stays compared to those without mental health diagnoses. Results indicated that patients with GI disorders and depression or anxiety were 1.29 times more likely to be readmitted within 90 days and had 1.50 times longer hospital stay. Conclusion: These findings underscore the importance of integrated care approaches addressing physical and mental health in managing chronic GI conditions. Future research should focus on targeted interventions to enhance mental health management and improve outcomes in this vulnerable patient population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".