DOP105 Patient-reported quality of life in moderate-to-severe Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: Insights from the communicating needs and features of IBD experiences (CONFIDE) survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is a long-term treatment goal for Crohn’s disease (CD) and Ulcerative colitis (UC).1 The CONFIDE study explored patients’ perspectives on the experiences and impact of CD and UC-related symptoms in the US, Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK), and Japan. Here, we assessed HRQoL among patients with CD or UC using the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ). Methods Online, quantitative, cross-sectional surveys were conducted among patients with moderate-to-severe CD or UC, defined by criteria based on previous treatment, steroid use, and/or hospitalisation. SIBDQ is a 10-item self-reported questionnaire assessing HRQoL within the past 2 weeks across bowel and systemic symptoms and emotional and social function.2,3 Each item is scored on a 7-point Likert scale (1=severe problem to 7=no problem); higher scores indicate better HRQoL.4 Patients were asked ‘How severe do you think your CD or UC is currently?’ and rated disease severity as mild/moderate/severe/don’t know. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise data. Results The analysis included 547 European (males [M]=55%, mean age=38 years [yrs]), 215 US (M=55%, 41 yrs), and 99 Japanese (M=68%, 43 yrs) patients with CD and 556 European (M=57%, 39 yrs), 200 US (M=62%, 40 yrs),and 124 Japanese (M=70%, 49 yrs) patients with UC. Of these, 347 (63%) European, 125 (58%) US, and 86 (87%) Japanese patients with CD, and 301 (54%) European, 153 (77%) US, and 52 (42%) Japanese patients with UC were receiving advanced therapies at data collection. Mean SIBDQ total scores were 4.1, 4.0, and 5.1 for European, US, and Japanese patients with CD, and 4.1, 3.9, and 5.6 for those with UC. Scores were similar across all SIBDQ domains and among patients receiving advanced therapies. Japanese patients reported numerically higher mean (SD) SIBDQ total and domain scores than European and US patients (Figure 1). In Europe and the US, patients who perceived their CD and UC as moderate or severe had numerically lower mean SIBDQ scores than those with mild disease perceptions. Japanese patients reported numerically higher mean SIBDQ scores than European and US patients, regardless of perceived disease severity (Figure 2). Conclusion Despite receiving advanced therapies, patients with CD or UC reported impaired HRQoL as measured by the SIBDQ, with Japanese patients reporting better HRQoL than European and US patients. This may stem from differences in characteristics of survey respondents, environment (e.g., bathroom access) and healthcare. Mean SIBDQ scores suggest that patients who perceive their CD or UC to be more severe report worse HRQoL. References 1. Al Khoury A, Balram B, Bessissow T, et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2022;67(6):1956-1974. 2. Irvine EJ, Zhou Q, Thompson AK. Am J Gastroenterol. 1996;91(8):1571-1578. 3. Yarlas A, D'Haens G, Willian MK, Teynor M. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2018;24(2):450-463. 4. Roseira J, Sousa HT, Marreiros A, Contente LF, Magro F. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021;19(1):59.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".