INCREASING UPPER DIGESTIVE SYMPTOM SEVERITY IN IBS IS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED PSYCHIATRIC DISTRESS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Many IBS pts also report symptoms (sxs) referable to the UGI tract or have abnormalities of UGI motility or sensation. Additionally, pts with one FGID often “morph” into another FGID at a later date. To better understand multi-organ sxs in IBS, we evaluated dyspeptic sxs in IBS pts, IBD pts and healthy ctrls. Methods: Consec. pts with IBD or RomeII IBS were enrolled and ctrls recruited by advertisement. Pts rated 15 dyspeptic sxs using the sx checklist of the Nepean Dyspepsia Index (NDI): upper abd. pain, discomfort and burning; chest pain, burning and regurgitation; upper abd. bloating; pressure; early satiety; inability to finish a meal; cramps; nausea; vomiting; belching/burping and bad breath. Pts also completed the SCL-90-R (SCL; a measure of psychiatric distress) and two measures of somatization: Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) and Somatosensory Amplification Scale(SSAS). Comparisons across groups were made by ANOVA with Bonferroni's posttest. Results: 42 ctrls, 29 IBD pts and 79 IBS pts were studied. IBS pts had significantly higher NDI sx scores than IBD pts who were significantly more symptomatic than ctrls (fig). Sx scores in IBS pts showed a bimodal distribution. Subsequently, we compared three groups: IBS with sx scores > 70 (n = 23); IBS with sx scores < 50 (n = 48); and IBD with sx scores < 50 (n = 26). IBS and IBD pts with sx scores <50 did not differ with respect to sxs, SCL, TAS or SSAS scores. In contrast, IBS pts with sx scores >70 had significantly greater scores for total sxs, SCL and TAS but not SSAS (table).TableFigureConclusions: Reporting of UGI sxs is common in IBS and IBD pts. A subset of IBS pts (29%) reported significantly more upper digestive sx severity. This group demonstrated both greater psychiatric distress and somatization than did IBD and IBS pts reporting fewer upper digestive sxs.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".