Incidence of non-esophageal eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease in Sweden 1990–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on the incidence of Eosinophilic gastrointestinal disease (EGID) distal to the esophagus are scarce. This study aimed to examine the incidence of non-eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) EGID in Sweden, as well as its three entities; eosinophilic gastritis (EoG), eosinophilic enteritis (EoN), and eosinophilic colitis (EoC). METHODS: We performed a nationwide population-based cohort study of individuals with incident biopsy-confirmed non-EoE EGID in Sweden from 1990 to 2015. Age-standardized and age-specific incidence rates (IRs) were calculated. RESULTS: We identified 1882 individuals with incident non-EoE EGID. Females constituted 58% and the mean age at diagnosis was 45 years. EoC was the most common subtype (62%). From 1990 to 2015, the mean age-standardized IR was approximately 0.8 per 100,000 person-years (IR = 0.79; 95%CI = 0.64-0.93), but with higher IRs in recent years (2013-2015: IR = 1.51; 95%CI = 1.09-1.93). The incidence increased especially during the 1990s, with a 27% annual increase before 2000, compared to a 3% annual increase thereafter. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) between females and males was 1.38 (95%CI = 1.26-1.51), but no evidence was found to suggest that the IRR varied across calendar periods or by age. The lifetime risk of diagnosed non-EoE EGID was 0.08% (1 in 1250) in females and 0.06% (1 in 1667) in males. CONCLUSION: The incidence of non-EoE EGID in Sweden increased between 1990 and 2015. This may reflect a higher disease awareness in recent years.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".