Prevalence and impact of disorders of <scp>Gut–Brain</scp> interaction in Sweden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous epidemiologic studies in Sweden have only covered some of the disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) and are not representative of the general population. This study aimed to define the prevalence and impact of DGBI in Sweden. METHODS: We used Swedish data from the Rome Foundation Global Epidemiology Study which include information on DGBI diagnoses, psychological distress, quality of life (QoL), healthcare utilization, and the impact of stress on GI symptoms. KEY RESULTS: The prevalence of having any DGBI was 39.1% (95% CI 37.0-41.2); esophageal disorders 6.1% (5.1-7.3), gastroduodenal disorders 10.7% (9.3-12.0), bowel disorders 31.6% (29.6-33.6), and anorectal disorders 6.0% (5.1-7.2). Subjects with a DGBI more commonly reported anxiety and/or depression, reduced mental and physical QoL, and more frequent doctor visits due to health problems. Subjects with a DGBI reported bothersome gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms to a greater extent and more than 1/3 had visited a doctor due to GI problems and of those 1/3 had seen multiple doctors. Prescription medications were available among 36.4% (31.0-42.0) who had bothersome GI symptoms and a DGBI, with sufficient symptom relief in 73.2% (64.0-81.1). Psychological factors and eating were reported to worsen GI symptoms and stress during the last month was greater in subjects with a DGBI. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: DGBI prevalence and its impact in Sweden is in line with global data, including increased healthcare utilization. GI symptoms are commonly affected by psychological factors and eating, and a high proportion of those on prescription medication report sufficient GI symptom relief.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".