Knowledge and practice of pediatricians regarding childhood constipation in the Arab world: results from a multicenter survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate knowledge and practice styles among medical providers with different professions and working in different Arab countries regarding their approach to childhood constipation. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional multinational survey in eight Arab countries. Pediatric care providers (PCPs), including pediatric specialists (PSs), pediatric residents (PRs), pediatric consultants (PCs), pediatric gastroenterologists (PGs), general practitioners (GPs), and pediatric surgeons (PSu), were included in our study. The survey was anonymous, and participants provided input on the definition and management of constipation. RESULTS: Of 4000 PCPs, 2579 completed the survey (response rate of 64.5%). Although the majority of respondents were aware of the Rome IV criteria to diagnose constipation, significant differences in the percentage of participants in different geographic countries regarding the definition of constipation were noted. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) was prescribed as a first-line treatment of fecal disimpaction significantly more frequently by pediatricians (PSs, PRs, PCs, PGs) than GPs and PSu (12.8% versus 7.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). Additionally, we found that pediatricians used special milk (high magnesium) as a first-choice formula significantly more often than other physicians (53.7% versus 37%, P < 0.001). For maintenance therapy, both pediatricians and nonpediatricians used dietary management with a special milk formula more than other treatment options (84.2% and 84%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased awareness of the Rome IV criteria, significant differences in knowledge and practice patterns regarding fecal disimpaction exist among PCPs from different Arab countries. The identification of these gaps may be helpful for policy-makers to produce targeted instructional resources on constipation for PCPs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".