ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2023
Delphi consensus survey: the opinions of patients living with refractory ulcerative proctitis and the health care professionals who care for them.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2023. 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.
- The Proctitis Paradox: Refractory Ulcerative Proctitis Associated With Development of Disease Complications in a Multicenter South Australian Cohort.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Separating Infectious Proctitis from Inflammatory Bowel Disease-A Common Clinical Conundrum.Microorganisms · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefractory ulcerative proctitis presents a huge clinical challenge not only for the patients living with this chronic, progressive condition but also for the professionals who care for them. Currently, there is limited research and evidence-based guidance, resulting in many patients living with the symptomatic burden of disease and reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis disease burden and best practice for management.
methodsA three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted among patients living with refractory proctitis and the healthcare experts with knowledge on this disease from the UK. A brainstorming stage involving a focus group where the participants came up with an initial list of statements was completed. Following this, there were three rounds of Delphi surveys in which the participants were asked to rank the importance of the statements and provide any additional comments or clarifications. Calculation of mean scores, analysis of comments and revisions were performed to produce a final list of statements.
resultsIn total, 14 statements were suggested by the focus group at the initial brainstorming stage. Following completion of three Delphi survey rounds, all 14 statements reached consensus following appropriate revision.
conclusionsWe established consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis from both the experts who manage this disease and the patients living with it. This represents the first step towards developing clinical research data and ultimately the evidence needed for best practice management guidance of this condition.
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.