ArticlePEC innovation2022
Treatment goals in IBD: A perspective from patients and their partners.
Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Approach to STRIDE-II in Real-Life Settings: Analysis and Practical Recommendations.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2024Article
- Relations between disease status and body composition in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease.European journal of pediatrics · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify and compare treatment goals between IBD patients and partners, and how these change upon receiving information. Methods: During a patient information day a self-made survey was distributed before and after a lecture about a physicians' view on treatments goals. Patients and partners were asked for their preferred treatment goals at 6 weeks and at 6 months and could choose between short-term goals (symptom free, improved functioning, better QOL, normal colonoscopy) and long-term goals (prevention of surgery, complications, flares and no steroids). Results: Being "symptom-free" (55.9%) was the preferred goal. Patients with higher disease activity chose more short-term goals (p=0.03) at 6 weeks. Age, gender and education did not affect treatment goals. Partners chose more short-term goals (p=0.03) at 6 weeks. Post-lecture, answers shifter to normal colonoscopy (4.2% versus 18.0%, p=0.001), and a better QOL (21.2% vs 33.3%, p=0.039) as goal at 6-months. Conclusions: Patients' 6-week treatment goals focused on being symptom-free and having a high QOL, especially those patients with high disease activity. Partners chose more short-term goals than patients at 6 weeks. Innovation: General health information can be applied and translated into treatment goals. This may assist in remote shared goal setting and 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.