Cited by 81Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseDiabetes Management and EducationNursing care and research

A critical review of self-management and educational interventions in inflammatory bowel disease

Barlow, Cate, Cooke, Debbie, Mulligan, Kathleen, Beck, Eric, Newman, Stanton·2010·Gastroenterology Nursing

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine self-management and educational interventions developed to support people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and to identify which type of intervention seems to be most effective. The search was deliberately overinclusive to capture studies that evaluated educational and self-management interventions. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the National Research Register, and Cochrane. Twenty-three studies were included. Thirteen of these were randomized controlled trials. The content of the interventions reviewed varied widely. As expected, it is the three studies that have explicitly labeled themselves as self-management interventions that have incorporated the greatest number of self-management techniques. Two of these studies reported the greatest number of improved outcomes in relation to symptom reporting, psychological well-being, and healthcare resource use. There is clearly a role for information in IBD, but this review supports research in other conditions that shows that education cannot be assumed to lead to improvements in health and well-being. Much of the research in this area focuses on education rather than self-management. Where self-management techniques have been applied, the findings tend to be more promising. Gastroenterology nurses (or in the United Kingdom, IBD specialist nurses) may be best placed to facilitate self-management in this group.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/sga.0b013e3181ca03cc

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barlow, C., Cooke, D., Mulligan, K., Beck, E., & Newman, S.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Cooke, Debbie
Venue
Gastroenterology Nursing
Published
2010-01
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
11-18
ISSN
1042-895X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057303156
Cited by
81
References
38
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Gastroenterology Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
Keywords
inflammatory bowel disease, self-management, patient education, educational intervention, symptom reporting, psychological well-being, health care utilization, nurse-led intervention
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Health Status, Humans, Patient Education as Topic, Quality of Life, Research Design, Self Care, Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Nurse's Role

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review