ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2024
Patients' and health professionals' research priorities for chronic pain associated with inflammatory bowel disease: a co-produced sequential mixed methods Delphi consensus study.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Developing IBD Outcome Effect Size Thresholds to Inform Research, Guidelines, and Clinical Decisions.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChronic pain in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is common and detrimental to quality of life. Recent Cochrane reviews identified a multitude of randomised controlled trial interventions, but the certainty of the findings is low or very low. We set out to reach a patient and professional co-produced Delphi consensus on treatment priorities, key outcomes and propose a model for understanding our findings.
methodsAn online survey was co-produced with Crohn's and Colitis UK and sent to patients and healthcare professionals in two phases, for prioritisation of treatments and outcome measures. Phase three consisted of four online group interviews, where patients and healthcare professionals discussed the rationale of their choices. Transcripts were combined with the free text data from the Delphi surveys and analysed through a three-phase qualitative technique.
resultsThe phase 1 survey was completed by 128 participants (73 patients, 3 carers and 53 health professionals). Diet was the top priority for both patients (n=26/73, 36.1%) and healthcare professionals (n=29/52, 56.9%). Phase 2 was completed by 68 participants. FODMAP (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols) diet, stress management therapy and relaxation therapy were the top three consensus priorities. Phase 3 group interviews were attended by 13 patients and 5 healthcare professionals. Key themes included: The patient as an individual, beliefs and experiences, disease activity influencing therapy choice, accessibility barriers and quality of life.
conclusionLow FODMAP diet, followed by psychological therapies were the highest-rated research priorities for healthcare professionals and patients. Funding bodies and researchers should consider these findings, alongside the model for understanding our findings, when making research decisions.
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.