Sex Differences, Menses‐Related Symptoms and Menopause in Disorders of Gut–Brain Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) predominate in women, but little is known about sex differences in menses-related or menopause symptoms. METHODS: Using data from the Rome Foundation Global Epidemiology Survey, we assessed Rome IV DGBI symptoms in individuals in 26 countries who met criteria for ≥ 1 of 5 DGBI: irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional dyspepsia (FD), functional constipation (FC), functional diarrhea (FDr), or functional bloating (FB). Participants included pre- and post-menopausal women with DGBI and age-matched men. Odds ratios estimated sex and age differences for symptom by sex or pre- vs. post-menopause in logistic regression; standardized mean difference (SMD) provided effect sizes. KEY RESULTS: 14,570 participants met criteria for ≥ 1 of the 5 DGBI. Women exceeded men in most symptoms. In FD, women stopped eating due to early satiety more than men (11.1 vs. 8.9 days/month, SMD 0.21). Symptoms were generally increased in premenopausal women and younger men compared to older counterparts; however, only premenopausal IBS, FD, and FC women reported increased constipation-associated symptoms. Compared to premenopausal women, postmenopausal women had increased accidental stool leakage in IBS and FDr, and increased digital manual maneuvers in FC (18% vs. 25% frequency, SMD -0.25). IBS and FD had the most menses-associated symptoms. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Women had higher symptom frequency across the 5 DGBI compared to men. Our findings suggest that premenopausal women have greater visceral perception than postmenopausal women, although increased outlet symptoms in postmenopausal women indicate greater anorectal/pelvic dysfunction. While age alone has some influence on symptoms, female sex hormones may also increase visceral perception.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".