ReviewTechniques in coloproctology2017
Assessing internet-based information used to aid patient decision-making about surgery for perianal Crohn's fistula.
Review in Techniques in coloproctology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Online Patient Resources to Support Shared Decision Making for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.World journal of surgery · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of online resources to support patient decision-making for full-thickness rectal prolapse surgery.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Pooled it
- Leveraging Social Media for Health Education: Dissemination of Crohn's Perianal Fistula Educational Videos via Facebook and Instagram.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2025Article
- Patient and Caregiver Perspectives on Their Experiences With Crohn's Perianal Fistulas.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2024Article
- Development of a Patient Decision Aid to Help People Living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2022Article
- Assessment of the quality and readability of online information on autopsy for the general public: a cross-sectional analysis.BMJ open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDecision-making in perianal Crohn's fistula (pCD) is preference sensitive. Patients use the internet to access healthcare information. The aim of this study was to assess the online information and patient decision aids relating to surgery for pCD.
methodsA search of Google™ and the Decision Aids Library Inventory (DALI) was performed using a predefined search strategy. Patient-focussed sources providing information about pCD surgery were included in the analysis. Written health information was assessed using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) and DISCERN criteria. The readability of the source content was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid score.
resultsOf the 201 sources found, 187 were excluded, leaving 14 sources for analysis. Three sources were dedicated to pCD, and six sources mentioned pCD-specific outcomes. The most common surgical intervention reported was seton insertion (n = 13). The least common surgical intervention reported was proctectomy (n = 1). The mean IPDAS and DISCERN scores were 4.43 ± 1.65 out of 12 (range = 2-8) and 2.93 ± 0.73 out of 5 (range = 1-5), respectively. The mean reading ease was US college standard.
conclusionsWe found no patient decision aids relating to surgery for pCD. The online sources relating to surgery for pCD are few, and their quality is poor, as seen in the low IPDAS and DISCERN scores. Less than half of the sources mentioned pCD-specific outcomes, and three sources were solely dedicated to providing information on pCD. Healthcare professionals should look to create a patient tool to assist decision-making in pCD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.