Usefulness of Self-Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptoms: Web-Based Study in Anhui, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal symptoms (GISs) are caused by a combination of biopsychosocial factors and are highly prevalent worldwide. Given their complex nature, coupled with ineffective communication of diagnoses by physicians, patients with intimate GISs often feel stigmatized. This, in turn, can inhibit their ability to express their thoughts and feelings adequately, leading them to over- or underreport their symptoms. Moreover, selective service-seeking for and reporting of GISs have a direct bearing on the stage of disease at presentation and, consequently, on the overall prognosis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of a web-based self-assessment of GISs as a supplementary means to cope with potential over- or underreporting during routine consultations. METHODS: GIS data were collected using a novel web-based self-assessment tool (n=475) and from nonparticipative observation of doctor-patient consultations (n=447) and household surveys (n=10,552) in Anhui, China. Data analysis focused primarily on the description of the composition of respondents and the occurrence rates of GISs by sociodemographics, and by symptom solicitation methods and settings. Chi-square power tests were used when necessary to compare differences in the occurrence rates between relevant groups. The level of significance for the 2-sided test was set at α<.05. RESULTS: The average occurrence rates of both upper and lower GISs derived from the web-based self-assessment were higher than those from the observation (upper GISs: n=661, 20.9% vs n=382, 14.2%; P<.001; lower GISs: n=342, 12.9% vs n=250, 10.8%; P=.02). The differences in 6 of the 9 upper GISs and 3 of the 11 lower GISs studied were tested with statistical significance (P<.05); moreover, a higher frequency rate was recorded for symptoms with statistical significance via self-assessment than via observation. For upper GISs, the self-assessed versus observed differences ranged from 17.1% for bloating to 100% for bad mood after a meal, while for lower GISs, the differences ranged from -50.5% for hematochezia or melena to 100% for uncontrollable stool. Stomachache, regurgitation, and dysphagia had higher occurrence rates among participants of the self-assessment group than those of the household survey group (20% vs 12.7%, 14% vs 11%, and 3% vs 2.3%, respectively), while the opposite was observed for constipation (5% vs 10.9%), hematochezia or melena (4% vs 5%), and anorexia (4% vs 5.2%). All differences noted in the self-assessed occurrence rates of specific, persistent GISs between sociodemographic groups were tested for nonsignificance (P>.05), while the occurrence rates of any of the 6 persistent GISs among respondents aged 51-60 years was statistically higher than that among other age groups (P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: The web-based self-assessment tool piloted in this study is useful and acceptable for soliciting more comprehensive GISs, especially symptoms with concerns about stigmatization, privacy, and shame. Further studies are needed to integrate the web-based self-assessment with routine consultations and to evaluate its efficacy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".