The management of irritable bowel syndrome: a European, primary and secondary care collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for the diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome for European doctors delivering primary care. These recommendations can be adapted by local medical groups according to their language, custom and health-care systems. METHODS: Twenty-one general practitioners and gastroenterologists from Europe attended a workshop planned by a steering committee. After a state-of-the-art symposium, four working groups considered the following aspects of irritable bowel syndrome management: what to tell the patient, diagnosis, non-medical treatment and psychosocial management. Current and future drug management was reviewed by the steering committee. The resulting recommendations were considered at two plenary sessions during the meeting, and by circulation of the material during development of the manuscript. RESULTS: The process permitted a unique dialogue between general practitioners and gastroenterologists, in which it was necessary to reconcile the specialists' emphasis on thoroughness with the practical, epidemiological and economic realities of primary care. Despite this dichotomy, consensus was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: European general practitioners and gastroenterologists have produced recommendations that emphasize education of the patient, a positive symptom-based diagnosis, diet and lifestyle advice, psychological support and a critical analysis of current specific psychological and pharmacological treatments.
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 | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".