ArticleCrohn's & colitis 3602025
Patient Advisory Groups in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Collaborative Relationship Between Patients and Researchers.
Article in Crohn's & colitis 360, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Patient advisory groups are key to guiding research studies through meaningful engagement with the population of interest. Although patient advisory groups are greatly valuable to research studies, they are underutilized in inflammatory bowel disease research. Thus, this study aims to describe the development and implementation of a patient advisory group and evaluate the perspectives of researchers and members. Methods: The Comprehensive Self-Management for inflammatory bowel disease study patient advisory group was created in 2022. The patient advisory group members and researchers completed the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool via an online survey. Thematic analysis of responses was used to identify common themes, and descriptive statistics were reported. Results: The patient advisory group comprised of patients with inflammatory bowel disease met quarterly. Eight members and three researchers evaluated the patient advisory group. The five emerging themes were (1) lived experience of patient advisory group members; (2) diversity and representation; (3) purposeful engagement; (4) positives of patient advisory group; and (5) improvements to patient advisory group. All members agreed or strongly agreed that the meetings were a good use of their time, and all researchers strongly agreed that the group added value to the research study. Conclusion: Patient advisory groups can create unique and positive experiences for both members and researchers when feedback is meaningfully sought, intentional, and incorporated into the study. There is a need to continue creating and using patient advisory groups with the intention of identifying problems and finding solutions alongside the inflammatory bowel disease community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.