P313 Understanding Inflammatory Bowel Disease patients’ experiences, expectations, and insights in identifying and managing anxiety and depression.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Patients living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) commonly experience mental health (MH) challenges, specifically anxiety and/or depression. Although, there is a growing awareness of the relationship between IBD and MH; detection, treatment, and management amongst care providers is limited. The purpose of this patient-oriented, qualitative study was to explore IBD patient experiences, perspectives, and insights of living with MH challenges and to understand their interactions with GI clinicians, from diverse care settings, to determine how to best support IBD and MH in IBD care. Methods Convenient and snowball sampling was used to recruit adult participants diagnosed with IBD and who had experience of living with MH challenges and were seeing a Gastroenterologist in Canada. This qualitative descriptive study used online focus groups to collect data. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Twenty-four participants from across Canada, both from rural and urban locations, participated in the study. IBD patient participants indicated that MH should be discussed by GI’s as part of routine clinical practice. All participants indicated that there is a lack of resources and access to MH services for IBD patients. Four main themes emerged from the data: 1) experiences with IBD: difficulties related to reintegrating into social settings, feelings of loneliness; 2) expectations around mental health support: the need to develop their own resiliency strategies due to the lack of structural resources regarding mental health and IBD in the clinical space; 3) GI engagement: HCPs were dismissive of mental health symptoms, often gaslighting patients when mentioning mental health concerns during clinical encounters; and 4) expectations: a need to standardize mental health care across IBD care settings with a focus on integrating specialized healthcare providers as part of multidisciplinary care teams to help address the need for mental health supports for IBD patients in Canada. Conclusion Effective detection, awareness, management, and the integration of patients’ perspectives and insights can help inform the development of mental health supports and services to help improve IBD care to a more wholistic approach to care. Results from this study will be interpreted in line with insights gathered from upcoming interviews of gastroenterologists and HCPs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".