MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236278255 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy008.270

A269 IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME PATIENT EXPERIENCE IN CANADA

2018· article· en· W4236278255 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gail Attara, James U. Gray, Guy Aumais

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de MontréalCanadian Society of Intestinal Research
FundersAllergan
KeywordsIrritable bowel syndromeBloatingMedicineAbdominal painConstipationDiarrheaQuality of life (healthcare)Functional gastrointestinal disorderDefecationInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, often debilitating, functional gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms that include abdominal pain and altered bowel behaviours of constipation and/or diarrhea, affecting approximately 13–20% of Canadians. The real world experience of patients is still poorly understood. To learn the how the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome affect these patients in Canada. The Gastrointestinal Society hosted a survey on its English (www.badgut.org) and French (www.mauxdeventre.org) websites during spring 2016. Links to this survey were posted on social media and via invitation using a market research company. To qualify, survey participants had to be living in Canada and have IBS or be the parent/guardian of a child with IBS. Questions were on a broad range of topics, including symptom severity, medication use, diet, experience with the health care system, comorbidities, and quality of life. Respondents from every province and territory totalled 2,961. 90% were between 30–69 years of age, 86% female, 97% were adults with IBS. 53% had IBS for more than 10 years. 35% had IBS-D, 18% IBS-C, 41% IBS-M, and 6% unsure. In IBS-C patients, abdominal pain was identified as a distinct predominant symptom. Those with IBS-D experienced many symptoms, with abdominal pain, bloating, urgency, and diarrhea identified as highly concerning. 24% experienced severe abdominal pain in the last 3 months, with severe pain being constant in a high proportion. 62% of patients indicated they experienced pain continuing after bowel movement. The top factors driving patients to see their physician were pain/discomfort and impact of IBS on their personal/professional/daily life. Approximately 93% and 49% of patients consulted with a family doctor and gastroenterologist, respectively, for their IBS. 60% had a colonoscopy. 12% have been hospitalized for IBS. 76% indicated that their symptoms interfere with everyday life and 46% missed work or school due to IBS. Most IBS patients use ≥2 medications on a regular basis to control their symptoms yet only 21% are confident their symptoms are under control. Compounding the issue, 16% are unable to afford any of their prescribed medications, and 26% can only afford some of them. Canadian IBS patients suffer from multiple symptoms, with the pain experienced by patients being the prime motivating factor to seek care. 79% have symptoms not under control. The conventional standard of care for IBS requires many different treatments to manage the multiple symptoms, with the majority of IBS patients requiring 2 or more treatments on a regular basis. IBS patients experience a wide range of symptoms and comorbidities. It can be a struggle for them to find treatments that are effective and affordable. The Gastrointestinal Society received funding from Actavis Specialty Pharmaceuticals Co., an affiliate of Allergan PLC to conduct this independent survey (Gail Attara is an employee); the physicians were not paid.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicGastrointestinal motility and disorders→French-language works237,207→