Towards Equitable Surgical Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review of Disparities in Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Existing evidence for disparities in inflammatory bowel disease is fragmented and heterogenous. Underlying mechanisms for differences in outcomes based on race and socioeconomic status remain undefined. We performed a systematic review of the literature to examine disparities in surgery for inflammatory bowel disease in the United States. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from 2000 through June 11, 2021, to identify studies addressing disparities in surgical treatment for adults with inflammatory bowel disease. Eligible English-language publications comparing the use or outcomes of surgery by racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, geographic, and/or institutional factors were included. Studies were grouped according to whether outcomes of surgery were reported or surgery itself was the relevant end point (utilization). Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. RESULTS: Forty-five studies were included. Twenty-four reported surgical outcomes and 21addressed utilization. Race/ethnicity was considered in 96% of studies, socioeconomic status in 44%, geographic factors in 27%, and hospital/surgeon factors in 22%. Although study populations and end points were heterogeneous, Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to undergo abdominal surgery when hospitalized; they were more likely to have a complication when they did have surgery. Differences based on race were correlated with socioeconomic factors but frequently remained significant after adjustments for insurance and baseline health. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical disparities based on sociologic and structural factors reflect unidentified differences in multidisciplinary disease management. A broad, multidimensional approach to disparities research with more granular and diverse data sources is needed to improve health care quality and equity for inflammatory bowel disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".