A237 SHARED DECISION MAKING: DESIGN OF A PREGNANCY IN IBD DECISION AID (PIDA)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Given a significant proportion of women with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are of child-bearing age, the development of a pregnancy IBD decision aid would benefit patients and clinicians. Lack of IBD-specific reproductive knowledge has been associated with increased “voluntary childlessness” and may contribute to inappropriate medication changes during or after pregnancy. Decision aids support decision making in pregnancy in general, as well as in multiple other chronic diseases. However existing literature has not identified such a resource for women with IBD. Aims To develop a decision aid to improve decision making regarding preconception and pregnancy in IBD among women with IBD. Methods We followed the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS). A steering committee of Canadian and Australian health care professionals with an interest in IBD management in pregnancy, in addition to patient representatives, was established. Themes chosen for discussion included inheritance, fertility, nutrition, medications, mode of delivery, breastfeeding, infant health. Initial patient and clinician focus groups were conducted and responses recorded with written/audio mediums. We developed an electronic PIDA draft that incorporates individualised information (type of IBD, pre-conception or pregnant, surgical history, medications) in personalized decision making. Further patient focus groups and interviews were conducted to obtain user opinion of the PIDA draft. Results In July 2017, patient and clinician focus groups were conducted at a Canadian site. Three patients (pre-conception) attended the focus group. Patient concerns - impact of disease and surgery on fertility and preterm delivery; impact of drug therapies on the fetus/ infant; impact of active disease on maternal and fetal/infant health. The clinician focus group included 3 IBD specialists, 2 IBD fellows, 2 IBD nurses, an obstetrician and a neonatal intensivist. Clinician concerns - absence of pre-conception counselling and lack of patient understanding about the impact of disease activity and IBD medication use in pregnancy. Additional patient feedback obtained through interviews (n=15) at two Canadian sites since March 2019 regarding the current electronic PIDA was positive, with comments about content, personalization, readability and unbiased presentation. Suggestions were made for inclusion of additional content such as impact of IBD on sexual function, laboratory changes during pregnancy, and timing of medications post-partum. Conclusions The pre and post PIDA design patient and clinician focus groups and interviews affirmed the role for PIDA. Main decisions considered necessary to address included ideal timing of conception pending disease activity, management of medications, and delivery methods. Ongoing user feedback will be obtained at Australian and Canadian sites during planned alpha testing. Funding Agencies WCHRI, Sinai Health System, UBC
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 | 0,024 | 0,044 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,017 | 0,002 |
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 ».