National differences in Ulcerative Colitis experience and management: An international survey of patients and healthcare professionals
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
An international survey was conducted to assess differences between countries in patients' and healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perceptions regarding ulcerative colitis (UC) and its management. Structured, cross-sectional, Web-based questionnaires assessing multiple disease indices were administered to adult chronic UC patients as well as experienced physicians and nurse specialists actively managing UC patients in Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Participants were recruited directly through hospitals and clinics, physician referrals, and patient and HCP access panels; patient advocacy groups/associations were not used for recruitment. A total of 775 patients, 475 physicians, and 50 nurses completed the survey. Patients' self-reported UC severity varied considerably from country to country (mild, 16%-45%; moderate, 46%-58%; severe, 4%-36%). Patients in Ireland reported the highest percentage of severe UC (36%), while patients in Spain reported the lowest percentage (4%). While physician ratings of UC severity among their own caseloads were more consistent across surveyed countries, doctors in Spain also provided the lowest estimate of severe UC cases (9%). Mean number of patient self-reported flares over the past year was greatest in France (8.0) and lowest in Ireland (2.5); 69% or more of patients considered this number of UC flares to be normal in all countries except Spain, where 71% considered the reported number to be abnormal. Expectations of UC control also differed, with a low of 26% of patients in Ireland stating that remission realistically involved ‘living without symptoms” compared with a high of 65% in Spain. Across all countries, a higher proportion of patients (45%-69%) compared with physicians (29%-45%) considered UC symptoms to affect patients' quality of life; this patient-physician difference was most apparent in France (69% vs 34%). Self-reported compliance with 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) therapy was highest for patients from Spain (91%) compared with patients from any other surveyed country (50%-73%). The highest percentage of patients reporting satisfaction with 5-ASA therapy was in Canada (99%), while the lowest was in Spain (58%). Canadians were the most likely to report arranging regular HCP visits (49%), and were the most willing to be open about discussing their UC during these consultations (79%); by contrast, Irish patients were least likely to arrange HCP visits (14%), and reported the lowest percentage willing to openly discuss their UC (46%). In conclusion, Spanish patients appeared to have the most optimistic perceptions of UC, highest expectations of UC control, and best compliance rates, consistent with Spanish physician reports of few severe UC cases; Canadian patients reported the highest rate of satisfaction with 5-ASA therapy and arranging regular HCP visits. However, a lower percentage of physicians considered that UC symptoms affected quality of life for the patient.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».