Irritable bowel syndrome: an international study of symptoms in eight countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This report is a preliminary comparative study of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms in eight countries, USA, Mexico, Canada, England, Italy, Israel, India, and China. We also assessed global symptom patterns and correlations and relationships to several psychosocial variables. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-nine participants completed a bowel symptom scale composed of four symptoms, abdominal pain or discomfort, bloating, diarrhea, and constipation as well as two psychosocial questionnaires, quality of relationship and attribution of symptoms to physical or emotional factors. RESULTS: Pain score in Italy, with the least urban population, was significantly higher than six of the seven other countries whereas it was lowest in India and England. Bloating was highest in Italy and constipation was highest in Mexico, both significantly higher than five other countries. Diarrhea was higher in China than five other countries. All significance values were P<0.05. Globally, diarrhea was less common than constipation, P<0.001 and bloating significantly correlated with constipation as well with pain, P<0.05. Composite analysis of psychosocial variables and symptoms indicated that family conflict correlated directly, P<0.05, whereas family support correlated indirectly, P<0.01, with pain and bloating. Pain, bloating and diarrhea were significantly attributed to physical etiology, P<0.01, whereas only diarrhea was attributed to emotional cause, P<0.05. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there are significant variations in irritable bowel syndrome symptoms in different geographic locations around the world. Various hypotheses that may explain our data such as cultural beliefs, gut contamination, urban and rural location, dietary practice, and psychosocial factors should be further investigated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".