National differences in ulcerative colitis experience and management among patients from five European countries and Canada: An online survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients' and physicians' perceptions of ulcerative colitis and its management are important for developing and guiding appropriate therapies. This study explored national differences in patients' and physicians' experiences, expectations, and beliefs about ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Structured, cross-sectional, online surveys evaluating various indices were completed by 775 adult patients with ulcerative colitis and 475 physicians actively managing ulcerative colitis patients from France, Germany, Ireland, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Canada. RESULTS: Patients' classification of their symptom severity differed across countries (mild, 16%-45%; moderate, 46%-58%; severe, 4%-36%). Expectations of disease control also varied, with 26% (Ireland) to 65% (Spain) describing that remission realistically involves "living without symptoms." Within each country, more patients (45%-69%) than physicians (28%-45%) considered ulcerative colitis symptoms to affect patients' quality of life. Mean number of patient-reported flares during the past year ranged from 2.5 in Ireland to 8.0 in France. Self-reported adherence with oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (during remission) was highest in Spain (91% vs 50%-73% across other countries). Spanish patients were more likely to self-adjust their medications (54% vs 2%-5%), but reported the most dissatisfaction with therapy (42% vs 9%-27%). Irish patients were least likely to arrange physician/specialist nurse visits (14% vs 36%-49%) and least open to discussion of their condition. CONCLUSIONS: Important national differences in ulcerative colitis patients' attitudes and perceptions were observed, which may help physicians improve patient care based on country-specific needs and influence self-assessments in clinical trials. The results suggest a need for structured patient education to improve adherence and outcomes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".