MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743773161 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314472.38

OC-038 The prevalence of rome iv functional dyspepsia and its impact on health impairment; results from a three-country general population study

2017· article· en· W2743773161 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Imran Aziz, OS Palsson, Hans Törnblom, AD Sperber, WE Whitehead, Magnus Simrén

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeartburnIrritable bowel syndromeQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationFunctional impairmentDistressHealth careEpigastric painPhysical therapyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthDiseaseClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The population prevalence of Rome IV functional dyspepsia and its effect on health impairment is unknown. We used data from a population-based study to address this, and compared somatisation, quality of life, healthcare utilisation, and presence of overlapping irritable syndrome and functional heartburn in individuals fulfilling criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia against non-dyspeptic controls. Method An internet-based health survey was completed by 6300 general population adults from three English-speaking countries (2100 each from United States, Canada, and United Kingdom). Quota-based sampling was used to ensure equal sex, age, and education distribution across the countries. The survey included questions on demographics, healthcare visits, medication use, criteria for the Rome IV functional dyspepsia as well as for irritable bowel syndrome and functional heartburn, the patient health questionnaire-12 somatisation measure, and the Short Form-8 quality of life questionnaire. Results Data was available for analysis from 5931 subjects (49.2% female; mean age 47.4 years, range 18–92). Overall, 551 (9.3%) of the population fulfilled criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia. This comprised 339 (61.5%) with postprandial distress syndrome-PDS, 97 (17.6%) with epigastric pain syndrome-EPS, and 115 (20.9%) with both. Subjects with functional dyspepsia had significantly greater health impairment than non-dyspeptic controls, with on average 73% seeking healthcare more than once yearly and 77% taking GI-relevant medication (i.e. GI-specific, psychotropics, analgesia, or complementary medicine). Notably, those with overlapping Rome IV EPS and PDS had higher frequency of co-existing irritable bowel syndrome and functional heartburn, worse somatisation, and poorer mental and physical QOL scores, compared to EPS- or PDS-alone (See table). Somatisation and QOL scores were similar between EPS- and PDS- alone. Note for table: Mean-values/percentages with different superscript letters are significantly different at a p<0.05 level. Conclusion Almost 10% of the population fulfil criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia. Subjects with Rome IV functional dyspepsia, in particular those with overlapping PDS and EPS, have considerable health impairment. This is despite frequent healthcare visits and use of GI-relevant medication. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207