A106 PATIENTS’ BARRIERS TO OPTIMIZING DIETARY INTERVENTIONS IN INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE (IBD): A DESCRIPTIVE QUALITATIVE STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Diet is a key influence on symptoms and disease activity in IBD patients, but effective dietary intervention relies on patient adherence, which is often sub-optimal in clinical practice and research. Adherence is shaped by individual barriers, beliefs and behaviours that must be addressed when recommending personalized dietary interventions, but these barriers are not well understood for IBD patients. Aims To identify IBD patients’ self-identified barriers to dietary modification and to understand their experiences and expectations for dietary interventions. Methods Adult patients with confirmed IBD attending a tertiary care centre IBD Clinic were invited to join heterogeneous focus group sessions with 2-6 participants or individual interviews moderated by a psychologist over a video communication platform (Zoom). Participants completed a demographics survey (REDCap). Audio files for all sessions were transcribed, de-identified and reviewed for accuracy by two reviewers, followed by thematic analysis (NVIVO). Results Between May 2022 and May 2023, 47 IBD patients were enrolled; 38 took part in 11 focus groups and 9 in individual interviews. Most participants (mean age 42 yrs; 60% female) were Caucasian (87%); 42% had a self-reported history of mental health disorders. Mean IBD duration was 16 yrs (0.5–44 yrs); 73% were in remission, and 68% had Crohn’s disease. Participants identified multiple barriers, which were consolidated using thematic analysis into 4 key themes, which encompassed 12 subthemes and related barriers (Table). Some patients (n= 30) reported adjusting their diet when diagnosed with IBD without following a specific diet, while some reported that diet was not discussed with their doctors (n=30). Conclusions IBD patients report multiple barriers to modifying their diet, highlighting the need to integrate specialized dietary advice into their healthcare. These findings could be used to develop screening questionnaires to guide personalized dietary interventions that address individuals’ barriers to dietary adoption Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".