Recurrent Abdominal Pain: Symptom Subtypes Based on the Rome II Criteria for Pediatric Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objectives Recurrent abdominal pain (RAP) is a common childhood complaint rarely associated with organic disease. Recently, the Pediatric Rome Criteria were developed to standardize the classification of pediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) using a symptom‐based approach. The authors tested the hypothesis that most patients with childhood RAP could be classified into one or more of the symptom subtypes defined by the Pediatric Rome Criteria. Methods Using a prospective longitudinal design, new patients with RAP (n = 114) were studied at a tertiary care children's medical center. Before the medical evaluation, parents completed a questionnaire about their child, assessing symptoms defined by the Pediatric Rome Criteria. Results Of the 107 children for whom medical evaluation revealed no organic etiology for pain, 73% had symptom profiles consistent with the Pediatric Rome Criteria for one of the FGIDs associated with abdominal pain (irritable bowel syndrome, 44.9%; functional dyspepsia,15.9%; functional abdominal pain, 7.5%; abdominal migraine, 4.7%) Conclusions This study provides the first systematic empirical evidence that RAP, originally defined by Apley, includes children whose symptoms are consistent with the symptom criteria for several FGIDs defined by the Rome criteria. The pediatric Rome criteria may be useful in clinical research to (1) describe the symptom characteristics of research participants who meet Apley's broad criteria for RAP, and (2) select patients with particular symptom profiles for investigation of potential biologic and psychosocial mechanisms associated with pediatric FGIDs.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".