Symptoms in Persons With Either Active or Inactive Crohn‘s Disease Are Agnostic to Disease Phenotype
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the relationship between disease symptoms and disease phenotype in a large Canadian cohort of persons with Crohn's disease (CD). METHODS: Adults (n=1515) with CD from 14 Canadian centers participated in the Mind And Gut Interactions Cohort (MAGIC) between 2018 and 2023. Disease activity was measured using the 24-item IBD Symptom Inventory-Short-Form (IBDSI-SF). We compared the symptoms commonly associated with active versus inactive disease, and explored symptoms patterns in relation to disease phenotype, based on the Montreal Classification. To assess psychological status the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 were used. RESULTS: The mean disease duration was 15.6±11.8 years. The 5 most common symptoms were similar for those with active disease, although at higher prevalence (89% to 98%) versus those with inactive disease (47% to 79%), and included fatigue, diarrhea, gas, bloating, and urgency. The intensity of symptoms was higher in those with active than inactive IBDSI-SF scores. The rank order and relative distribution of the symptoms and intensity of the symptoms reported were similar between those with different disease phenotypes B1, B2, and B3 and L1, L2, and L3. Persons with active IBDSI-SF had a higher prevalence of anxiety (24.6%) and depression (38.2%) versus persons with inactive IBDSI-SF (6.3% and 8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with CD with active and inactive disease by IBDSI, experience similar symptoms, but the prevalence of symptoms and their intensity is greater in persons with active IBDSI. Persons with inactive IBDSI report many symptoms. There was no difference in symptom reporting by disease behavior or location.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".