Trial reportDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Randomized Trial of Intensive Nurse-Led Follow‑Up Versus Standard Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.
Trial report in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2026. 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.
- Letter to the Editor Regarding Barkan et al.'s Article, "Randomized Trial of Intensive Nurse‑Led Follow‑up Versus Standard Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease".Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNurses play a key role in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management. This randomized controlled trial evaluated intensive nurse-led program in patients with IBD starting advanced therapy.
methodsPatients were randomized (1:1) to intensive nurse follow‑up (Arm A) or standard care (Arm B). Both arms received baseline nurse education; Arm A additionally had scheduled nurse calls and visits. Primary outcome was reduction in IBD‑Disk score in W12. Secondary outcomes were W52 reduction, robust response (> 20-point improvement), and IBD-Disk remission (score < 40).
resultsOverall, 98 patients were randomized (Arm A: n = 50; Arm B: n = 48) with similar baseline characteristics. Mean baseline IBD‑Disk scores were 49.2 ± 20.7 in Arm A and 42.0 ± 19.8 in Arm B (p = 0.07). At W12, both groups improved, with greater IBD-Disk reductions in Arm A (16.1 ± 22.9 vs. 10.1 ± 20.1, p = 0.09). At W52, improvement was greater in Arm A (18.4 ± 20.7 vs 9.4 ± 17.8; p = 0.08). More patients achieved robust response in Arm A (49% vs 21%, p = 0.013) at W12. By W52, IBD-Disk remission was achieved by 22/25 (88%) patients in Arm A vs 18/28 (64%) in Arm B (p = 0.045).
conclusionsIn this pilot randomized trial, intensive nurse-led follow-up did not significantly improve IBD-Disk at week 12, yet favorable trends of functional outcomes were observed. Intensive nurse‑led follow‑up program may improve quality of life in patients with IBD. These findings support the integration of specialist IBD nurses to improve patient‑centered outcomes.
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.