Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42439965›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nutrition2026

Diet and ileostomy: a qualitative comparison of patient and healthcare professional perspectives in the United Kingdom and Australia.

Niamh Magee, Ellen E A Simpson, Helen McCarthy, Pauline Douglas, Erika Rosbotham, L Kirsty Pourshahidi, James Davis, Martin Veysey, Nenad Naumovski, Chris I R Gill

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Niamh MageeNutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-8224-6986
Ellen E A SimpsonSchool of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4572-8436
Helen McCarthyInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, P.O. Box 14428, Melbourne, VIC, 8001, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7204-4158
Pauline DouglasNutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6515-2310
Erika RosbothamNutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1255-8821
L Kirsty PourshahidiNutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), Ulster University, Coleraine, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2251-5251
James DavisSchool of Engineering, Ulster University, Belfast, BT15 1ED, Northern Ireland, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4284-4431
Martin VeyseySchool of Medicine and Psychology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2605, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8652-0036
Nenad NaumovskiSchool of Medicine and Psychology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2605, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2841-4497
Chris I R GillNutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), Ulster University, Coleraine, UK. c.gill@ulster.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4335-7571

Funding

Medical Research Council (MR W029561)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIleostomy formation requires major dietary adjustments to prevent complications and maintain nutritional status, yet dietary advice is often inconsistent, and evidence guiding best practice remains limited. This study explored how people living with an ileostomy (ileostomates) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) experience and support dietary management, uniquely comparing UK and Australian perspectives.

methodFifty semi-structured interviews were conducted with ileostomates (n = 26) and HCPs (n = 12 stoma care nurses, n = 12 dietitians) across the UK and Australia. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis guided by the Social Ecological Model (SEM).

resultsSeven main categories emerged, spanning intrapersonal, interpersonal, community, institutional and public policy factors. Ileostomates reported persistent dietary restriction, fear of food bolus blockages, and reliance on online forums when HCP follow up was limited. HCP transcripts highlighted variations in practice, constrained caseloads, and gaps in evidence underpinning dietary guidance. Country-specific differences were observed, with Australian ileostomates emphasising hydration and geographical barriers. HCPs in the UK highlighted reinforcement of advice from a stoma nurse or dietitian as being central to dietary reintroduction, whereas their Australian counterparts prioritised a patient-led approach.

conclusionFindings reveal systemic gaps in dietary support across both countries and highlight the need for individualised support, improved professional training, and integration of digital or telehealth solutions to enhance accessibility and continuity of care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDietHealth PersonnelIleostomyAdultAgedAustraliaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesNutritional StatusNutritionistsQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomDietary adviceHealthcare professionalIleostomyQualitativeStoma

Identifiers

PMID42439965
PMCPMC13364819

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.