A Cross-Sectional Study of the Association between Overnight Call and Irritable Bowel Syndrome in Medical Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shift work has been associated with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which includes gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain, constipation and diarrhea. Overnight call shifts also lead to a disruption of the endogenous circadian rhythm. HYPOTHESIS: Medical students who perform intermittent overnight call shifts will demonstrate a higher prevalence of IBS symptoms when compared with medical students who perform no overnight call shifts. METHODS: First- and second-year (preclinical) medical students have no overnight call requirements, whereas third- and fourth-year medical (clerkship) students do have overnight call requirements. All medical students at the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry (London, Ontario) were invited to complete an anonymous, web-based survey or an identical paper copy that included demographic data, the Rome III questionnaire and the IBS-Quality of Life measure (IBS-QOL). The prevalence of IBS symptoms and quality of life secondary to those symptoms were determined. RESULTS: Data were available for 247 medical students (110 preclinical students, 118 clerkship students and 19 excluded surveys). There was no significant difference in the presence of IBS between preclinical and clerkship students (21 of 110 [19.1%] versus 26 of 118 [22.0%]; P=0.58). The were no significant differences in mean (± SD) IBS-QOL score of those with IBS between preclinical (43.5±8.3) and clerkship students (45.7±13.8) (P=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in overnight call was not associated with the development of IBS or a lower quality of life secondary to IBS in medical students.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".