ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Validation of a Patient-Created, Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the United Kingdom.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionInflammatory bowel disease (IBD) significantly impacts quality of life and has high healthcare contact. Ensuring that patients are experiencing the best care is therefore essential and has been the focus of many quality improvement initiatives. To support this, in collaboration with patients, we developed a patient-reported experience measure for IBD (IBD-PREM) for use in a UK context. This article refers to the validation of this patient-developed measure to ensure it is valid and reliable.
methodsUsing data from the AWARE-IBD study, 287 participants provided data between November 2021 and November 2024. The IBD-PREM as well as the IBD-Control questionnaire was collected at 3-month intervals as well as 2 weeks post baseline. Validation was completed through testing the following aspects: acceptability (response rate and missing data rates), reliability (internal consistency and test-retest reliability), validity (construct and structural validity using factor analysis) and responsiveness (ceiling/floor effects and smallest detectable difference).
resultsHigh response rates and low missing data demonstrated acceptability of the IBD-PREM. There was also good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.88). Low ceiling and floor effects demonstrate suitable responsiveness as did the ability to differentiate between patients with active and inactive disease (effect size = 0.62). The confirmatory factor analysis suggested the current domain structure (three domains) is not optimum and factor loadings indicated some potentially redundant items, which is supported by the high internal consistency (α = 0.97).
conclusionsThe patient-developed IBD-PREM is a tool that can be used as a method for assessing the healthcare experiences of IBD patients in the United Kingdom. Superior psychometric properties were found compared to measures developed through traditional researcher-led approaches suggesting the benefit of involving patients early in the methodological process. Further refinement in terms of item reduction and domain restructure should be implemented to optimise the PREM as well as external validity to other contexts. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and members of the public were engaged from an early stage in the development of the PREM, contributing directly to the design and content of the IBD-PREM. This article goes on to validate this patient-created measure with input from a patient representative.
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.