ArticleCrohn's & colitis 3602024
Remote Between Visit Monitoring in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care: A Qualitative Study of CAPTURE-IBD Participants and Care Team Members.
Article in Crohn's & colitis 360, 2024. 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.
- Nurses' Experience Using Telehealth in the Follow-Up Care of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease-A Scoping Review.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Review
- Models of outpatient care delivery in inflammatory bowel disease: a scoping review.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We recently showed that CAPTURE-inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-a care coordination intervention comprised of routine remote monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and a care coordinator-triggered care pathway-was more effective at reducing symptom burden for patients with IBD compared to usual care. We aimed to understand how patients and care team providers experienced the intervention and evaluate purported mechanisms of action to plan for future implementation. Methods: In this study, 205 patients were randomized to CAPTURE-IBD (n = 100) or usual care(n = 105). We conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 of the 100 participants in the CAPTURE-IBD arm and 5 care team providers to achieve thematic saturation. We used qualitative rapid analysis to generate a broad understanding of experiences, perceived impact, the coordinator role, and suggested improvements. Results: Findings highlight that the intervention was acceptable and user-friendly, despite concerns regarding increased nursing workload. Both participants and care team providers perceived the intervention as valuable in supporting symptom monitoring, psychosocial care, and between-visit action plans to improve IBD care and health outcomes. However, few participants leveraged the care coordinator as intended. Finally, participants reported that the intervention could be better tailored to capture day-to-day symptom changes and to meet the needs of patients with specific comorbid conditions (eg, ostomies). Conclusions: Remote PRO monitoring is acceptable and may be valuable in improving care management, promoting tight control, and supporting whole health in IBD. Future efforts should focus on testing and implementing refined versions of CAPTURE-IBD tailored to different clinical settings.
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.