S830 Comparison of Weekday and Weekend Dietary, Symptom, and Breath Gas Profiles in Adults With GI Symptoms
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Accurate assessment of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and dietary patterns is essential for effectively managing GI patients. In the general population, dietary patterns typically change from weekdays to weekends. Fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) are food components that are known to trigger GI symptoms. In this retrospective study of adults with GI symptoms, we evaluated whether FODMAP consumption, symptom patterns and non-fasting breath gas levels changed from weekdays to weekends. Methods: Subjects with mild/moderate GI symptoms used an app-connected breath analyzer (FoodMarble, Ireland) to collect hourly H2 and CH4 readings during waking hours and logged meal content and symptom severity (0-10 scale) while following their habitual diet for 1 week. Subjects with an average symptom severity ≥ 3 for at least 1 of bloating, flatulence or abdominal were included in the analysis. Average hourly H2 and CH4 levels, FODMAP consumption and symptom scores were compared between weekdays and weekends. Results: 626 subjects (383 women, mean age 44 ± 13) were included in the analysis. There were no significant weekday-weekend differences in hourly average FODMAP consumption (Figure 1A), although there was an early rise in weekday consumption, possibly reflecting earlier breakfast times. Weekend morning H2 was slightly higher than weekday H2, which may reflect increased fermentable intake on the evenings previous or later evening meal timings on the weekend (Figure 1B). The typical rise in diurnal H2 seen in the middle of the day happens sooner on weekdays. Possibly due to earlier morning and midday meal times. Weekday-weekend CH4 levels were more stable throughout the day. The symptoms are relatively similar between the weekend and weekday. For the weekend, bloating is generally somewhat lower, flatulence somewhat higher, especially for the latter half of the day and abdominal pain slightly elevated in the morning (Figure 1C). Conclusion: Despite some points of difference, overall dietary, breath gas and symptom patterns do not appear to vary greatly between weekdays and weekends in this cohort. This indicates that there would typically not be a need to stratify by weekend and weekday in analyses of these variables in similar cohorts. Where breath samples are to be collected at particular time points in the day, the timing could be set to where the weekend and weekday levels are most similar and least changeable on average.Figure 1.: (A) Hourly averages of weekday-weekend FODMAP consumption in adults with GI symptoms. (B) Hourly averages of weekday-weekend breath H2 and CH4 levels in adults with GI symptoms. (C) Hourly averages of weekday-weekend bloating, flatulence and abdominal pain scores. Note: n numbers are limited to those who logged a given symptom.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».