Healthy lifestyle score and irritable bowel syndrome: A cross‐sectional study in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle modifications play an important role in the management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but there is limited information on any associations of combined lifestyle-related factors with IBS in Middle Eastern populations. We, therefore, assessed the associations of a "lifestyle score," in analogy to lifestyle scores applied in studies of other disorders, with IBS in adults. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study on 3363 Iranian adults, a healthy lifestyle score (HLS) was constructed using information about dietary habits, dietary intake, physical activity, smoking status, and psychological distress, which was collected using validated questionnaires. A modified version of the Rome III questionnaire (in Persian) was used to diagnose IBS and its subtypes. KEY RESULTS: Individuals with the highest HLS had a 65% lower odds of having IBS compared with those in the lowest category (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.26-0.48). Participants with healthy dietary habits, including regular meal pattern, slow/moderate eating rate, moderate intra-meal fluid consumption, moderate/long meal-to-sleep interval, and low/moderate consumption of fatty foods, had significantly lower odds of having IBS compared with those with unhealthy dietary habits (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.69-0.96). Moreover, individuals with lower levels of psychological distress, compared with those with higher levels of distress, had significantly lower odds of IBS (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.40-0.60). CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Our data suggest that having an overall "healthy lifestyle" is related to substantially reduced odds of IBS, suggesting that adhering to a healthy lifestyle pattern, including dietary habits, diet quality, physical activity, smoking, and psychological distress, can be considered as a key management strategy for IBS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".