Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37685335›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Precision Medicine in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Vito Annese, Monica Annese

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Antibacterial activity and impact on keratinocyte cell growth ofCurrent research in microbial sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Vito AnneseDepartment Gastroenterology IRCCS San Donato Policlinic, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20100 Milan, Italy.
Monica AnneseDepartment Gastroenterology, IRCCS Hospital Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, 71013 San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are traditionally defined as the two main subtypes of inflammatory bowel disease. However, a more recent view considers IBD as a spectrum of heterogeneous phenotypes with consistent differences in clinical presentation and behaviors, likely explained by differences in underlying pathogenetic mechanisms. The etiology is still elusive, and the suggested pathogenesis is a complex interplay among genetic predisposition and abnormal immune response at the mucosal intestinal level, activated by only partially identified environmental triggers leading to altered intestinal permeability and impaired handling of gut microbiota. The undeniable continuous progress of medical therapy with more frequent shifts from traditional to more advanced modalities also underlines the actual unmet needs. We are using medications with completely different mechanisms of action, with a lack of predictive factors of outcomes and response and still an unsatisfactory rate of success. In addition, we are missing still valuable and accurate markers to predict disease progression and severity in order to avoid under- or over-treatment. In such a complex scenario, it is undoubtful that the application of artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms may improve the management and pave the way for precision and eventually personalized medicine in these patients; however, there are still several challenges that will be the focus of this review.

Indexed as

artificial intelligence (AI)Crohn’s disease (CD)inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)precision medicine (PM)ulcerative colitis (UC)

Identifiers

PMID37685335
PMCPMC10487169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.