International Perspectives on Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Opinion Differences and Similarities Between Patients and Physicians From the IBD GAPPS Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), including Crohn disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are complex disorders with multiple comorbidities. We conducted international patient and physician surveys to evaluate current experiences and perceptions of patients with CD or UC and physicians who treat IBD. METHODS: The IBD Global Assessment of Patient and Physician Unmet Need Surveys comprised a patient survey and a physician survey, fielded in North America and Europe between August 16, 2019, and November 10, 2019. Adults with CD or UC (targeted 1:1 ratio) were recruited from physicians, patient advocacy groups, and recruitment panels; physicians were recruited by recruitment agencies and panels. RESULTS: In total, 2398 patients with IBD (1368 CD, 1030 UC) and 654 physicians completed surveys. Anxiety and depression were the most common comorbidities among patients with IBD. Patients and physicians were generally aligned on treatment goals and patient-physician communication. Patients with IBD reported high quality-of-life impact by rectal urgency and need to use the toilet, which were rated as lower-impact by physicians. Patients defined remission based on symptoms; physicians defined remission based primarily on clinical tests. Patients expected current treatments to control their disease for a longer duration than did physicians. Patients expressed more concern about corticosteroid use compared with physicians; many physicians reported prescribing corticosteroids for more than 4 months per year in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients could benefit from education about disease remission and expectations for current therapies. High corticosteroid use is concerning to patients, and physicians should minimize the use of corticosteroids for extended periods of time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".