Pediatric Patient and Caregiver Satisfaction With the Use of Transabdominal Bowel Ultrasound in the Assessment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Transabdominal bowel ultrasound (TABUS) is emerging as an attractive, noninvasive tool in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Patient and caregiver experience with TABUS is not well described. We aimed to determine pediatric patient and caregiver satisfaction with TABUS and the impact of IBD severity, gender, age, and a history of anxiety on satisfaction. METHODS: Pediatric patients (0-18 years old) with suspected IBD prospectively underwent baseline TABUS, magnetic resonance enterography (MRE), blood work, stool studies, and endoscopy. Patients and their caregiver each completed a cross-sectional satisfaction questionnaire (5-point Likert scale) after the baseline investigations. RESULTS: There were 54 patients included (67% male). The majority were completely satisfied and strongly agree TABUS was better tolerated than other investigations, regardless of disease severity ( P > 0.05). Patients with higher Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn Disease (SES-CD) scores felt that TABUS increased their understanding of their IBD ( P < 0.05) and disease location ( P < 0.05). Patients with Crohn disease had similar responses to those with ulcerative colitis, but more strongly agreed that TABUS was better than MRE and endoscopy ( P < 0.05). Those with anxiety did not have an increased level of worry about potential ultrasound findings ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients and their caregivers were highly satisfied with TABUS, preferring it to other modalities. It did not lead to increased worry, and was particularly important in those with severe IBD. These findings support wider implementation of this well tolerated and preferred monitoring tool in pediatrics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".