Living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Crohn’s and Colitis Canada Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in therapies for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), patient quality of life continues to be significantly impacted. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of IBD on patients and families with regard to leisure, relationships, mental well-being and financial security, and to evaluate the quality and availability of IBD information. METHODS: An online survey was advertised on the Crohn's and Colitis Canada website, and at gastroenterology clinics at the University of Alberta Hospital (Edmonton, Alberta) and University of Calgary Hospital (Calgary, Alberta). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 281 IBD patients and 32 family members. Among respondents with IBD, 64% reported a significant or major impact on leisure activities, 52% a significant or major impact on interpersonal relationships, 40% a significant or major impact on financial security, and 28% a significant or major impact on planning to start a family. Patient information needs emphasized understanding disease progression (84%) and extraintestinal symptoms (82%). There was a strong interest in support systems such as health care insurance (70%) and alternative therapies (66%). The most common source of information for patients was their gastroenterologist (70%); however, most (70%) patients preferred to obtain their information from the Crohn's and Colitis Canada website. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of IBD on interpersonal relationships and leisure activities was significant among IBD patients and their families. Understanding the disease, but also alternative treatment options, was of high interest. Currently, there is a discrepancy between interest in information topics and their availability. Respondents reported a strong desire to obtain information regarding disease progression, especially extraintestinal symptoms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".