Trial reportBMC gastroenterology2025
A randomized control trial to assess the effectiveness of a brief educational intervention on colonoscopy preparation and experience in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.
Trial report in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. 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.
- Colonoscopy with Attention, Reliability and Excellence-The CARE Project.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
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
backgroundColonoscopy is important for diagnosis, assessment and dysplasia screening in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A good bowel preparation is required for complete and adequate assessment. TRIAL
designRandomised, assessor blinded parallel arm trial with 1:1 allocation.
methodsPatients with IBD undergoing colonoscopy were randomised to control group (standard preparation with written instructions) or experimental group (additional brief video educational intervention). Outcome assessors and colonoscopist were masked to the allocation. Primary outcome was adequacy of bowel preparation (Boston bowel preparation score of ≥ 6).
resultsOf 130 patients randomised, 107 (57% males, mean age 38.4 years, 84% with ulcerative colitis) were analysed. The groups were similar for baseline characters (age, gender, rural residence, educational status, duration of illness, IBD therapies, and endoscopic activity). Adequate bowel preparation was present similar numbers in experimental group compared to control group (43.1% versus 35%) (p = 0.43). The groups were similar for perfect preparation (7.8% versus 8.9%) (p = 0.84), worsening of disease activity (3.9% versus 3.7%) (p = 1.00), time to cecal intubation (240, 191 s versus 268, 228 s) (p = 0.43), tolerance (45.1% versus 30.4%)(p = 0.12), and willingness to undergo a repeat colonoscopy (54.9% versus 55.4%)(p = 0.97).
conclusionA brief educational video intervention did not improve bowel preparation in patients with IBD undergoing colonoscopy.
trial registrationCTRI/2023/09/057436 on 11 September 2023.
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.