Cure8

Why This Matters

Improving nursing support during IBD trial pathways could help people stay engaged, understand what participation involves, and report problems earlier—potentially making trials safer and more equitable.

This matters to patients and clinicians because better support can reduce confusion during transitions between routine care and trial participation.

Who Should Pay Attention

Clinicians, clinical research nurses, trial designers, researchers, patient advocates, caregivers

Study Snapshot

Story typeResearch paper
Evidence typeResearch paper
Source depthMetadata only

What To Know

This narrative review examines how nursing‑led support can affect participant engagement, adherence, retention, and protocol enactment across the standard care → clinical trial → standard care pathway in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

The authors synthesize literature on specialist and research nursing, placebo/nocebo processes, health literacy and teach‑back, telemonitoring, continuity of care, transitions, implementation, and intervention fidelity to identify practical nursing functions that influence trial participation.

The review identifies five interrelated supportive nursing functions: expectation‑shaping at screening/enrolment; literacy‑sensitive education and teach‑back; structured hybrid contact to support continuity; transition‑sensitive assistance during trial entry, amendment, and exit; and governance strategies for role clarity, safety, and equity.

The authors argue these functions may help participants interpret uncertainty, understand protocol expectations, maintain continuity, and report symptoms promptly—factors that can support engagement and adherence in IBD trials.

This paper is framed as a focused narrative review using realist‑informed interpretive principles rather than a formal realist review. The findings are presented as conceptual mechanisms and implementation considerations rather than quantitative trial outcomes or tested interventions.

Keep In Mind

Narrative review using realist‑informed interpretation of heterogeneous literature; not a formal systematic review or meta‑analysis, and it does not present new clinical trial results.

Source Details

Review the original publication for the complete reporting, methods, and context.

Read Original Source
Research paper Evidence type derived from source or registry metadata.
PublicationPubMed Central
JournalJGH Open
AuthorsNapolitano, Daniele, Bozzetti, Mattia, Mora, Vincenzina +8 more
Indexed viaPubMed Central
Source typeResearch repository record
PublishedAug 19, 2026, 12:00 AM
Content availableMetadata only

This Cure8 brief is based on source text from the linked article. Cure8 is informational only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

Related Reading

Browse latest news →