Functional Dyspepsia and Its Subgroups: Prevalence and Impact in the Rome IV Global Epidemiology Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the most common disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). Varying reported population prevalences probably reflect different definitions and methodological approaches. AIM: To study the prevalence and impact of FD and its subgroups in an internet survey. METHODS: A total of 54,127 respondents from 26 countries completed the survey including the Rome IV diagnostic questionnaire, Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), PHQ-12, PROMIS Global-10, demographics, and medical history. Respondents reporting a history of relevant organic disease, or fulfilling criteria for self-induced or cyclic vomiting, or cannabinoid hyperemesis were excluded. RESULTS: Rome IV FD prevalence was 7.2% (range 2.2%-12.3%), significantly higher in women and decreased with age. The most prominent subtype was postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) (66.6%). Rome IV IBS was found in 26.1% of those fulfilling FD criteria. Functional heartburn and chronic nausea and vomiting criteria were fulfilled in, respectively, 9.0% and 7.0%. Fulfilling FD symptom criteria was significantly associated with increased prevalence of anxiety and depression and with lower quality of life and higher healthcare seeking behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Rome IV FD is one of the most prevalent DGBI globally. Across countries, it is associated with female sex, younger age, psychological distress, reduced quality of life, and higher health care utilisation. PDS is the dominant subgroup. Overlapping other DGBI are present in a minority.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".