SynthesisInflammatory bowel diseases2026
Heterogeneity in Histological Evaluation of Microscopic Colitis in Randomized Clinical Trials: An Umbrella Review.
Synthesis in Inflammatory bowel diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of microscopic colitis (MC) is based on endoscopic biopsy with histological assessment. Histological outcomes (remission, response or improvement) are important treatment targets in clinical trials. Although a substantial body of research on MC has been published in recent years, no standardized criteria currently exist for its histological outcomes. We sought to review and summarize the histological evaluation of MC in published systematic reviews (SRs) assessing the efficacy of interventions and to examine the heterogeneity in histological evaluation among the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in those SRs.
methodsWe conducted an umbrella review (ie, an overview of systematic reviews) of published SRs. A literature search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, and Embase was performed up to May 2025. Definitions of histological evaluation and monitoring following interventions were extracted and summarized from the published SRs and the RCTs included within them.
resultsFourteen SRs with meta-analyses that focused on interventions were included. Nineteen RCTs were included in these SRs. Of them, 12 fully published RCTs reported histological outcome data and met our inclusion criteria. The definitions for histological outcomes varied between RCTs but were generally based on reduction in lamina propria cellularity, intraepithelial lymphocytes, or collagen band thickness.
conclusionsThis umbrella review highlights the heterogeneity in the definitions of histological outcomes in MC RCTs. The summarized evidence will support ongoing efforts to develop consensus definitions for histological outcomes in order to facilitate clinical trials of medical therapies for MC.
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.