MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405675101 · doi:10.1136/bmjgast-2024-001585

Optimising fatigue, abdominal pain and faecal incontinence in people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD-BOOST Optimise): feasibility study of a checklist and algorithm for initial nurse-led management

2024· article· en· W4405675101 on OpenAlexaff
Imogen Stagg, Ailsa Hart, Fionn Büttner, Asma Fikree, John McLaughlin, Jean‐Frédéric LeBlanc, Sonia Bouri, Thomas Hamborg, Laura Miller, Christine Norton

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Gastroenterology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersProgramme Grants for Applied ResearchDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineChecklistPsychological interventionAlgorithmPhysical therapyCalprotectinFecal incontinenceDiseaseIrritable bowel syndromeInflammatory bowel diseaseInternal medicineSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Many people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experience fatigue, pain and faecal incontinence that some feel are inadequately addressed. It is unknown how many have potentially reversible medical issues underlying these symptoms. METHODS: We conducted a study testing the feasibility of a patient-reported symptom checklist and nurse-administered management algorithm ('Optimise') to manage common medical causes of IBD-related fatigue, pain and faecal incontinence. We conducted qualitative interviews with nurses implementing the algorithm. RESULTS: 515 individuals reporting IBD-related symptoms were invited to participate, of whom 201 (39%) consented. 194/201 (97%) returned the symptom checklist, of whom 157 (81%) returned a postal faecal calprotectin sample. Five (3%) participants reported 'red flags' and 31/157 (20%) participants had a faecal calprotectin result ≥200 µg/g, of whom 12 (8%) were judged to have likely active inflammation when clinical symptoms and disease history were reviewed. The algorithm suggested at least one clinical test or intervention for fatigue, pain or faecal incontinence in 67 (43%) participants, of whom 25 (37%) declined. Among 87 participants for whom clinical actions were indicated, 57 (66%) completed follow-up outcomes 3 months after algorithm implementation. Three nurses interviewed found the Optimise algorithm easy to administer. CONCLUSION: Implementing the Optimise checklist and algorithm appears feasible in UK clinical practice, with adjustments needed to minimise missing items. Not all patients accepted algorithm-indicated interventions, but a yield of 43% with symptoms having potentially reversible causes detected is clinically useful. Nurses endorsed ease and utility of the implementation process. Optimise now needs clinical effectiveness to be assessed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open GastroenterologySame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207