ArticlePloS one2019
Impact of faecal calprotectin measurement on clinical decision-making in patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the correlation between fecal and serum calprotectin in inflammatory bowel disease.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Human protozoa infection and dysplasia in ulcerative colitis: a neglected aspect in a prominent disease.Parasitology research · 2023Article
- Implementing electronic patient reported outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease: patient participation, score reliability and validity.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- The association of fecal calprotectin and respiratory exacerbation in cystic fibrosis patients.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaecal calprotectin (FC) seems to be the best available biomarker for the detection of intestinal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study is to clarify whether the measurement of FC has changed the number of ultrasound and endoscopic procedures, drug modifications, as well as FC re-measurements in IBD patients.
methodsThis retrospective study included 242 IBD patients with available FC values (case cohort) and 46 patients without an available FC value (control cohort). Clinical consequences such as carrying out abdominal ultrasound, endoscopy, drug modification or FC re-measurement at the next ambulatory presentation or during in-patient stay were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the association between clinical decision-making and patient's characteristics, especially FC value.
resultsOverall, 192 (67%) clinical consequences were noted in both cohorts. In the case cohort 174 (91%) implications were noted compared to 18 (9%) in the control cohort (P < 0.001). In the case cohort, significantly more clinical consequences were detected in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) as well as in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients with a FC value > 250 mg/Kg than in patients with a value of ≤ 250 mg/Kg. In CD patients with high FC values significantly increased numbers of abdominal ultrasounds, endoscopies and FC re-measurements were noted. In UC patients with high FC values significantly increased numbers of abdominal ultrasounds, drug modifications and FC re-measurements were noted.
conclusionMeasurement of FC may alter physician's clinical decision-making in IBD patients beside other clinical and diagnostic parameters. Further prospective and survey studies are warranted to evaluate the influence of FC measurement in the daily clinical decision-making.
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.