Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patient Experience: A Survey of Patient-Reported Symptoms by Irritable Bowel Syndrome Subtype and Impact on Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, debilitating, functional gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms of abdominal pain, bloating, and altered bowel behaviours of constipation (IBS-C), diarrhea (IBS-D), or a mixture of both (IBS-M). There is limited information published on the impact of symptoms on everyday life in the Canadian population. Methods: An online survey was conducted with individuals diagnosed with IBS to capture the severity and frequency of patient-reported symptoms, including impact on productivity, quality of life, healthcare utilization, treatment access, and corresponding symptom relief. Responses from the three subtypes of IBS were categorized to illustrate differences among these. Results: There were 2,470 qualified respondents (filtered from 2,981, which included nonspecific IBS). IBS-M was the most common subtype, at 44 percent. Most individuals from all three IBS subtypes reported experiencing moderate to severe abdominal pain (63-70 percent) and bloating (59-75 percent) over the previous 3 months. Persons living with IBS-C reported severe bloating (32 percent), straining (72 percent), and tenesmus (78 percent) whereas those with IBS-D experienced severe urgency (63 percent) and incontinence (29 percent). Symptoms interfered in daily life, sometimes in 46 percent and often in 23 percent of respondents. Patients reported mood and anxiety disorders as common comorbidities with IBS (mood disorders: 30-34 percent; anxiety disorders: 25-30 percent). Conclusions: This study focuses on the differences among the IBS subtypes. IBS impacts productivity and healthcare utilization, which requires further investigation on approaches to improve treatment. The frequency and severity of symptoms in IBS are high and only a few respondents reported that their symptoms are under control.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".