Dietary interventions for recurrent abdominal pain (RAP) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in childhood
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Between 4% and 25% of school-age children complain of recurrent abdominal pain (RAP) of sufficient severity to interfere with daily activities. It is unclear whether the diagnosis includes children with different aetiologies for their pain. For the majority no organic cause for their pain can be found on physical examination or investigation. Although most children are likely managed by reassurance and simple measures, a large range of interventions have been recommended.To determine the effectiveness of dietary interventions for recurrent abdominal pain in school-age children.The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) 2006 (Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to Dec 2006), EMBASE (1980 to Dec 2006), CINAHL (1982 to Dec 2007), ERIC (1966 to Dec 2006), PsycINFO (1872 to Dec 2006), LILACS (1982 to Dec 2006), SIGLE (1980 to March 2005), and JICST (1985 to 06/2000) were searched . Where appropriate, search filters were employed. In addition, researchers working in this area were asked to identify relevant studies.Randomised or quasi-randomised studies of any dietary treatment versus placebo or no treatment in school-age children with a diagnosis of RAP or functional gastrointestinal disorder based on the Rome II criteria.Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed quality and extracted data. Where appropriate studies were pooled using a random effects meta-analysis.Seven trials were included in this review. Two trials, including 83 participants, compared fibre supplements with placebo (Christensen 1982, Feldman 1985), with data from one study reported in two papers (Christensen 1982, Christensen 1986). The pooled odds ratio for improvement in the frequency of abdominal pain was 1.16 (95% CI 0.45-2.87). Two trials, including 90 participants (Lebenthal 1981, Dearlove 1983) compared lactose-containing with lactose-free diets. Neither reported data in a form which could be used in the meta-analysis and the former trial had a loss to follow-up of 45%. We were not able to obtain further data for either trial. Three trials (Bausserman 2005, Gavronska 2007, Young 1997) comparing supplementation with Lactobacillus with placebo met the inclusion criteria but only two (Bausserman 2005, Gavronska 2007), including a total of 168 children, provided analysable data. The pooled odds ratio for improvement of symptoms was 1.17 (95% CI 0.62, 2.21).There is a lack of high quality evidence on the effectiveness of dietary interventions. This review provides no evidence that fibre supplements, lactose free diets or lactobacillus supplementation are effective in the management of children with RAP.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».