A80 IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN IBD PATIENT CARE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting patients and healthcare providers worldwide. During the first wave of the pandemic, healthcare delivery shifted from in-person to virtual clinics. Non-urgent and some emergent procedures, including endoscopies, surgeries, and imaging, were delayed to limit the spread and divert resources to COVID-19. Aims To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in care to IBD patients Methods A survey study was conducted to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on IBD care. All patients had a virtual clinic appointment between March to July 2020 at either: University of Alberta Hospital or the University of Calgary Clinic. A section of the survey assessed patient experience of virtual clinics and delays in access to IBD care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results A total of 1581 patients were contacted to complete the survey. 628 patients agreed to participate in the survey, however not all patients completed each component. The mean age of patients who participated in the survey was 48 years (SD = 15.19). 408 patients responded to satisfaction/future use questions: 84.3% (344) patients agree/strongly agree they were comfortable communicating to the physician using the remote system, 77.5% (316) of patients agree/strongly agree that virtual clinic is an acceptable way to receive healthcare services, 84.8% (346) of patients agree/strongly agree they would use virtual care services again, and 82.6% (337) agree/strongly agree they were satisfied with the telehealth system. Additional challenges were reported by 228 patients. Fear and stress (infection risk/mental health concerns/unemployment) was reported by 57.4% (131) patients. Access to healthcare services, PPE, and community resources was a challenge experienced by 26.3% (60) patients. Additionally, 16.2% (37) patients experienced uncertainty around IBD-specific care, including procedures, treatments, labs, and medications. Overall, 17.3% of patients reported some type of delay in care by July 2020. Table 1 shows the proportion of patients with a delay by type of care and the median delay: 5.7% of patients with IBD had surgery delayed by a median of 10 weeks (8–16 weeks). Conclusions While some delays in healthcare delivery occurred during the first wave of the pandemic, overall 82.7% of patients with IBD maintained their care without disruption. Sustaining healthcare delivery to the IBD community required adaptation to virtual care; however, patient satisfaction was overwhelming positive among patients with IBD. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".