IBD impact on quality of life and perception of disease activity in Italian patients and physicians: An IBD-PODCAST study sub analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: IBD-PODCAST was a global real-world study to assess suboptimal disease control (SDC) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) using STRIDE-II criteria. AIM: To evaluate quality of life (QoL), disease characteristics and control in patients with SDC, comparing perspectives of patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) in the Italian subpopulation. METHODS: IBD-PODCAST-Italy enrolled adult outpatients from 17 centers. The study used a combination of retrospective chart reviews and cross-sectional assessments to gather data on treatment, patient-reported outcomes (QoL, fatigue, work productivity) and clinical activity. Patient and HCP perceptions of disease control based on STRIDE-II criteria, which included clinical, laboratory and endoscopic findings were also assessed. RESULTS: SDC was identified in 53.4 % (95 % CI: 44-62.8 %) of CD and 49.0 % (95 % CI: 39.1-59.0 %) of UC patients. Those with SDC had lower short IBD questionnaire scores (45.9 ± 12.0) compared to optimal disease control (ODC) patients (57.4 ± 9.9). Extraintestinal manifestations and bowel urgency were more frequent in SDC patients. Physician-perceived SDC (14.5 %) was higher than patient-perceived SDC (8.8 %) and agreement between patient and HCP assessments was low. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SDC experienced impaired QoL. The discrepancy between patient and physician perceptions of disease control, alongside objective measures, highlights the need for further research to optimize care and improve outcomes.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".