ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2026
Patient Identification of the most important outcomes in a gastrointestinal behavioral health program.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBrain-gut behavior therapies (BGBTs) are evidence-based treatments for patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). While BGBT clinical trials prioritize decreasing symptom severity and improving anxiety, depression, and quality of life, these outcomes are not designed based on patients' priorities. We aimed to determine the optimal patient-centered outcome measures to assess change following BGBT using a stakeholder-engaged qualitative process.
methodsWe interviewed patients 1:1 with DGBI and IBD with and without BGBT experience. Interview data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. Subsequent focus groups reviewed the qualitative findings to verify accuracy, identify high-priority and missing constructs, and create clinical use recommendations. Measure recommendations were developed based on patients' perspectives and the extant literature.
resultsQualitative interviews (N = 20) yielded five domains: lived experience of disease, how to cope with illness, perceived value of behavioral intervention, outcomes and measurement, and behavioral intervention effects. Focus group participants (N = 14) broadly confirmed that the qualitative themes represented their experience with BGBTs and prioritized confidence in symptom management, social connectedness, lived experience with disease, and mental/behavioral health symptoms. They highlighted the importance of brevity, semi-regular re-evaluation, and access to results. Resultant measures included: Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, PROMIS Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Conditions-Symptoms, UCLA Loneliness Scale, IBD DISK (adapted), and PHQ-2/GAD-2.
conclusionsThe identified treatment targets differed from those prioritized in clinical trials. However, DGBI and IBD literature suggests that many of the identified constructs supersede traditional outcomes such as anxiety and depression. These results can guide integration of patient-reported outcome measures into gastropsychology programs and highlight the value of involving patients in program development.
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.