P0605 Nutritional Therapy for IBD: a new non-profit organization that offers trusted, evidence-based information and novel resources on diet and nutritional therapies in IBD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background There is a well-described need for credible resources on the role of diet in IBD, with many Internet and social media sources found to be unbalanced and misaligned with the evidence1,2. Nutritional Therapy for IBD (https://www.nutritionaltherapyforibd.org/) was founded in 2019 to enhance the well-being and health outcomes of children and adults with IBD by optimizing medical care through adjunctive evidence-based nutritional therapy. An overview of the characteristics of this organization’s online resources, web traffic, and user impressions are described. Methods Website performance metrics were collected via Google Analytics from Oct 31, 2023, to Oct 31, 2024, and an online survey was conducted for two weeks in Oct 24. Results The website fosters training and dissemination of knowledge of the role of diet and nutritional therapies in IBD and includes four main sections: dietary options for IBD, research database, information for patients and families, and tools for healthcare professionals. Over the study period, there were 453,103 visits and 151,588 active users from 10 countries, with an average of 3 visits per user. The top-engaged countries were the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, South Africa, and Australia (Figure 1). The most visited website sections included 1) Recipes, 2) The Crohn’s Disease Exclusion Diet, and 3) The low FODMAP diet for non-inflammatory symptoms (Figure 2). Of 81 users completing the survey, 80.2% were female, 35.8% were patients with IBD, 29.5% were healthcare professionals, and 13.6% were family members. Among healthcare professionals, 30.3% were registered dietitians, 21.2% IBD-specialized registered dietitians, and 12.1% IBD gastroenterologists. 91.4% of responders indicated the content was useful, with high scientific rigor (82.7%), and stated the content influenced how they viewed nutrition as part of IBD care (74.1%). The most valuable resources were research summaries (80.0%), resources for implementing nutritional therapies in daily life (73.8%), and detailed information on specific nutritional therapies (68.8%). Conclusion Internet users are clearly interested in and find it useful to have access to evidence-based information about dietary interventions for IBD. Scientific rigor combined with accessible language are distinctive features of Nutritional Therapy for IBD, developed to help healthcare professionals use the best available evidence to inform their practice and help patients make informed choices about nutrition. References 1.Fusco, S., Briese, K., Keller, R., et al. (2024). Are Internet information sources helpful for adult Crohn’s disease patients regarding nutritional advice? J Clin Med, 13(10), 2834. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13102834 2.Gkikas, K., Wan, M., Svolos, V., et al. (2024). YouTube as a source of information for food, diet-related items, and advisory comments for the management of inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis, 30(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izad076
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.126 | 0.050 |
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".