Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mathematical weighting of the pediatric Crohnʼs disease activity index (PCDAI) and comparison with its other short versions

Turner, Dan, Griffiths, Anne M., Walters, Thomas D., Seah, Tong, Markowitz, James, Pfefferkorn, Marian, Keljo, David, Waxman, Jacob, Otley, Anthony, LeLeiko, Neal S., Mack, David, Hyams, Jeffrey, Levine, Arie·2012·Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (PCDAI) has become the standard outcome measure in pediatric Crohn's disease (CD) clinical research. Other versions have been proposed but without systematic evaluation. The aim was to assess validity and responsiveness of the abbreviated PCDAI (abbrPCDAI), short PCDAI (shPCDAI), and modified PCDAI (modPCDAI) as measures of disease activity and to compare these with a mathematically weighted version developed here (wPCDAI). METHODS: The raw data from four prospectively collected datasets were used, totaling 437 children with CD (including two clinical trials). Discriminant validity utilized physician global assessment of disease activity (PGA), and construct validity the correlation with PGA and laboratory results. Feasibility and face validity were ascertained by a survey of 33 experts in pediatric CD. RESULTS: The wPCDAI had better performance than the PCDAI in construct validity and responsiveness and it discriminated better between the disease activity categories (area under the receiver operator characteristic [ROC] 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-0.99). In comparison to the original PCDAI, the noninvasive versions (abbrPCDAI and shPCDAI) had lower face, construct, and discriminant validity but were judged to be significantly more feasible. The modPCDAI performed well in the construct validation but was consistently inferior in all other parameters. Cutoffs that correspond to remission, response, and gradations of disease activity were determined for each index. CONCLUSIONS: The newly weighted wPCDAI performed better than the original PCDAI and is more feasible. The noninvasive versions (shPCDAI and abbrPCDAI) are inferior to the full PCDAI, but when needed in retrospective studies either may be equally used.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ibd.21649

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 301

Metadata

Authors
Turner, D., Griffiths, A. M., Walters, T. D., Seah, T., Markowitz, J., Pfefferkorn, M., Keljo, D., Waxman, J., Otley, A., LeLeiko, N. S., Mack, D., Hyams, J., & Levine, A.
Venue
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Published
2012-01
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
55-62
ISSN
1078-0998 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019804961
Cited by
301
References
20
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mathematical weighting of the pediatric Crohnʼs disease activity index (PCDAI) and comparison with its other short versions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ibd.21649
The paper
Turner, D., Griffiths, A. M., Walters, T. D., Seah, T., Markowitz, J., Pfefferkorn, M., Keljo, D., Waxman, J., Otley, A., LeLeiko, N. S., Mack, D., Hyams, J., & Levine, A. (2012). Mathematical weighting of the pediatric Crohnʼs disease activity index (PCDAI) and comparison with its other short versions. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1002/ibd.21649

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.