Dietary behaviors in relation to prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome in adolescent girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: There is limited evidence regarding the relationship between dietary behaviors and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This study aimed to explore the association between diet-related practices and prevalence of IBS. METHODS: The study was conducted among 988 adolescent girls living in Iran. Dietary behaviors were pre-defined and assessed in nine domains using a pre-tested questionnaire. To investigate the association between diet-related practices and the presence of IBS, this study used logistic regression analysis in crude and adjusted models. RESULTS: The prevalence of IBS was 16.9% in this population. Compared with individuals who did not consume fluid with their meal, those who always consumed fluid with meals had a greater chance of IBS (odds ratio [OR]: 2.91; P: 0.01). This study found a direct relationship between a greater intake of spicy food and IBS prevalence (OR: 5.28; P: 0.02). The individuals who ate fried foods every day also had a greater risk of IBS compared with those who did not consume fried foods (OR: 1.65; P: 0.01). The subjects who had lost ≥ 5 teeth had 2.23 times greater odds for IBS than the individual who had lost ≤ 1 tooth (OR: 2.23; P: 0.01) was a significant inverse relationship between the chewing sufficiency and the risk of IBS (OR: 4.04; P: 0.02). These associations remained significant after controlling for potential confounder. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-meal fluid intake, chewing insufficiency, higher tooth loss, and the consumption of spicy and fried food were associated with increased risk of IBS. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".