MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406699259 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjae190.1432

P1258 Disease course of inflammatory bowel disease unclassified during the first ten years following diagnosis: A prospective European population-based inception cohort – the Epi-IBD cohort

2025· article· en· W4406699259 on OpenAlexaff
Mads Damsgaard Wewer, Søren Lophaven, Péter L. Lakatos, Lóránt Gönczi, R. Salupere, Hendrika Adriana Linda Kievit, Kári Rubek Nielsen, Jóngerð Midjord, Viktor Domislović, Željko Krznarić, N Pedersen, Jens Kjeldsen, Jonas Halfvarson, Shaji Sebastian, Adrian Goldiș, Naila Arebi, Pia Oksanen, A Neuman, Vibeke Andersen, K. Katsanos, Anastasios Koukoudis, Svetlana Turcan, Pierre Ellul, J Kupcinskas, Gediminas Kiudelis, Mathurin Fuméry, I P Kaimakliotis, R. D’Incà, S. Lombardini, Vicent Hernández, Alberto Fernández, Ebbe Langholz, Pia Munkholm, Johan Burisch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInflammatory bowel diseaseCohortProspective cohort studyDiseaseUlcerative colitisInflammatory Bowel DiseasesCohort studyCrohn's diseasePopulationInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The Epi-IBD cohort is a prospective European population-based cohort of 1,508 patients diagnosed in 2010 and 2011 with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) according to Copenhagen criteria in centres across 17 European countries. The study aims to describe treatment strategies, disease course and prognosis of IBD unclassified (IBDU) across Europe. Methods Patients with IBDU were defined as not fulfilling the Copenhagen diagnostic criteria of Crohn’s disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), but still required IBD related treatment and monitoring. They were followed prospectively from the time of diagnosis until December 31st, 2020, death, emigration or loss of follow-up. Clinical data on surgery, hospitalizations, and medical treatment were captured throughout the follow-up period and entered into a validated web-database, www.epi-ibd.org. Patients with IBDU were categorised as CD-like, UC-like or mixed CD-UC based on disease location and continuity of the affected bowel segments at diagnosis. Results In total, 129 IBDU patients aged ≥15 years from 22 centres were included. They comprised 8.5% (N=129/1,508) of the total cohort. The disease location was reported in Table 1 where 4 patients had unknown disease location at baseline. At diagnosis, 16% (N=25/129) were CD-like, 52% (N=62/129) were UC-like and 32% (N=42/129) were mixed CD-UC.During the 10-year follow-up, 32% (N=41/129) were re-classified as either CD (N=16) or UC (N=25). The crude 1-, 5-, and 10-year rates for re-classification of diagnosis were 19%, 26% and 32%. The time to initiation of therapies and the distribution of therapies according to re-classification of IBDU diagnosis at baseline are presented in Figure 1 A-B . Advanced therapies were used in 13% (N=17/129) of patients over the 10-year follow-up, and was initiated after a median period of 1.9 years (inter-quartile range 0.9-8.1). An intestinal resection was required in 7% (N=9/129). After 1, 5, and 10 years, 9%, 19% and 26% of the patients diagnosed with IBDU at baseline, respectively, required hospitalisation. Conclusion After 10 years of follow-up, a third of patients initially diagnosed with IBDU were re-classified as either CD or UC. The disease course was in general mild with a low number of patients requiring advanced therapy, intestinal resection, and hospitalization. However, patients who were re-classified as CD or UC were more frequently treated with medical therapies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and ColitisSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207