Psychological determinants of irritable bowel syndrome and its impact on quality of life: a machine learning approaches.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This study examined the associations between psychosocial factors, Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) diagnosis, and quality of life (QOL) in both control and IBS groups. Additionally, we explored the potential influence of psychosocial factors on the onset of IBS and developed a machine-learning model for IBS prediction. Background: IBS is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder, with various factors predicting its severity and associated symptoms. Methods: Through convenience sampling, a cross-sectional study recruited participants diagnosed with IBS (n=134) and healthy controls (n=150) from Arak Gastroenterology Clinics. Linear regression assessed the impact of psychosocial factors on IBS symptom severity and QOL. Logistic regression analyzed the association of these factors with IBS onset. Machine learning algorithms were used to predict IBS based on psychosocial features. Instruments include IBS-SSS, IBS-QOL, Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), Visceral Sensitivity Index (VSI), and Pain Catastrophe Scale (PCS). Results: A total of 284 participants (61.27% females) were recruited in the study, with a mean age of 36.48±10.75 years. Compared to controls, IBS patients exhibited significantly higher scores on measures of pain catastrophizing scale (PCS, 40.95 vs. 27.73), somatization (13.91 vs. 6.49), and alexithymia (60.23 vs. 54.71) as well as lower VSI (40.54 vs. 72.10). For those with IBS, only difficulty identifying feelings and somatization remained associated with worse symptoms, while VSI presented an inverse correlation. Psychological factors were inversely related to QOL. Elevated levels of alexithymia (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.48, 1.63), somatization (OR 1.80; 95%CI 1.12, 2.48), and PCS (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.30, 2.10) were associated with a higher chance of developing IBS, while higher VSI (OR -1.65; 95% CI -1.89, -1.42) was protective. Among machine learning models, logistic regression based on these factors (excluding alexithymia) and age achieved good performance (AUC: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.94; Accuracy: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.90) in predicting IBS onset. Conclusion: Psychological factors were linked to worse IBS symptoms and quality of life. A machine learning model for IBS prediction presented promising results.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".