ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluating the clinical care, quality of life and overall experiences of patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) during the pandemic: A Canadian mixed-methods study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pandemic restrictions impacted healthcare, particularly during the first year. We evaluated the impact of the pandemic on quality of life and clinical care among patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). This mixed-methods study administered quality of life surveys (Fear of COVID-19 Scale [FCV-19S], EuroQol 5-dimension 3-level [EQ-5D-3L], 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Instrument Survey [PROMIS-29]) and a PBC Care Delivery questionnaire to 348 Canadian PBC patients, followed by two focus groups with patients (n = 14) and stakeholders (n = 3). Quality of life scores were compared among sub-groups (i.e., care delays and pandemic appointment type) and with various reference populations. Most participants were female (94.0%) and Caucasian (88.2%), with a median age of 63.0 years (IQR: 55.9-71.2). During the pandemic, 75.8% had the majority (≥ 50%) of their hepatologist appointments virtually, but only 22.4% preferred to continue with virtual care post-pandemic. Participants with care delays had worse scores on the FCV-19S (p = 0.014), EQ-5D-3L (p = 0.009), and PROMIS-29 (i.e., fatigue, anxiety, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles and activities, p < 0.01), compared to those without care delays. PBC patients had worse PROMIS-29 scores compared to a general population (p < 0.01). Both patients and stakeholders stressed the importance of in-person appointments, while recognizing a role for virtual appointments post-pandemic. PBC patients' quality of life worsened during the pandemic, especially those with delayed care. Most PBC patients expressed a preference for in-person appointments post-pandemic.
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.