Rome III criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders: too much overlap to be useful?: Table 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Functional gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are common. The Rome III classification of these symptoms into mutually exclusive disorders attempts to improve the homogeneity of patients recruited into clinical trials from secondary and tertiary care. Previous investigators have reported significant degrees of overlap between some of these conditions, but no study has examined this issue in its entirety. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey of consecutive new patients consulting a Gastroenterologist at two tertiary care centres. All individuals were provided with the self-administered, validated, Rome III diagnostic questionnaire for the adult functional GI disorders. We scored completed questionnaires according to the algorithm devised by the authors, but suspended the mutual exclusivity between various syndromes, such as dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome and functional constipation, required by the questionnaire in order to examine the degree of overlap between them. Results A total of 1822 patients completed the questionnaire. There were 1253 (68.8%) who met criteria for at least one of the functional GI disorders and 880 (70.2%) of these patients met criteria for more than one disorder when the mutual exclusivity was suspended. The degree of overlap between the various disorders varied between 3% and 86% and was greatest for functional vomiting and chronic idiopathic nausea (table 1). Table 1 OC-051 Overlap of Rome III functional GI disorders Rome III functional disorder Postprandial distress syndrome (%) Chronic idiopathic nausea (%) Functional vomiting (%) Irritable bowel syndrome (%) Postprandial distress syndrome (n = 561) 251 (44.7) 65 (11.6) 249 (44.4) Chronic idiopathic nausea (n = 370) 251 (67.8) 77 (20.8) 188 (50.1) Functional vomiting (n = 90) 65 (72.2) 77 (85.6) 39 (43.3) Irritable bowel syndrome (n = 444) 249 (56.1) 188 (42.3) 39 (8.8) Conclusion The degree of overlap between the various Rome III diagnostic was variable but large in some cases. The magnitude of this overlap was of remarkably similar magnitude in some instances. These data suggest that some of these disorders have similar aetiologies or pathogenetic mechanisms and that attempts to classify them separately may be both artificial and futile.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".