Cited by 719Gastrointestinal motility and disordersPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsGastroesophageal reflux and treatments

Development and Validation of the Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaire for Adults

Open access
Palsson, Olafur S., Whitehead, William E., van Tilburg, Miranda A.L., Chang, Lin, Chey, William, Crowell, Michael D., Keefer, Laurie, Lembo, Anthony J. +9 more·2016·Gastroenterology

Abstract

The Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaires were developed to screen for functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), serve as inclusion criteria in clinical trials, and support epidemiological surveys. Separate questionnaires were developed for adults, children/adolescents, and infants/toddlers. For the adult questionnaire, we first surveyed 1,162 adults without gastrointestinal disorders, and recommended the 90 th percentile symptom frequency as the threshold for defining what is abnormal. Diagnostic questions were formulated and verified with clinical experts using a recursive process. The diagnostic sensitivity of the questionnaire was tested in 843 patients from 9 gastroenterology clinics, with a focus on clinical diagnoses of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional constipation (FC), and functional dyspepsia (FD). Sensitivity was 62.7% for IBS, 54.7% for FD, and 32.2% for FC. Specificity, assessed in a population sample of 5,931 adults, was 97.1% for IBS, 93.3% for FD, and 93.6% for FC. Excess overlap among IBS, FC, and FD was a major contributor to reduced diagnostic sensitivity, and when overlap of IBS with FC was permitted, sensitivity for FC diagnosis increased to 73.2%. All questions were understandable to at least 90% of individuals, and Rome IV diagnoses were reproducible in ¾ of patients after one month. Validation of the pediatric questionnaires is ongoing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.014

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Rome IV criteria are potentially more specific than Rome III.

    “This feature makes the Rome IV criteria potentially more specific than Rome III.”

    From British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the management of irritable bowel syndrome (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    In the IBS sensitivity analysis (page unavailable), the paper says Rome IV uses the more restrictive requirement of abdominal pain rather than Rome III’s abdominal pain or discomfort. It also estimates Rome IV specificity in a population survey, but the passages do not compare Rome IV and Rome III specificity, so they do not establish that Rome IV is more specific. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The change in minimum frequency of abdominal pain reflected findings of a normative survey showing that adopting a higher threshold would lead to fewer healthy people in the general population being misclassified as having IBS.

    “This change reflected the findings of a normative survey showing that adopting a higher threshold for the frequency of abdominal pain required to meet criteria for IBS would lead to fewer healthy people in the general population being misclassified as having IBS, 9 and therefore risk being 'medicalised', and having to take drugs for the condition.”
  • Our study should not be extrapolated to the other EDS subtypes, such as vascular EDS, which have recognised and potentially catastrophic gastrointestinal complications.

    “Our study should also not be extrapolated to the other EDS subtypes, such as vascular EDS, which have recognised and potentially catastrophic gastrointestinal complications. 14”
  • An international consortium published updated guidelines in 2017, whereby far more stringent criteria will hopefully improve the diagnostic specificity of hEDS and allow clear distinction from HSD.

    “To overcome these issues, an international consortium published updated guidelines in 2017, whereby far more stringent criteria will hopefully improve the diagnostic specificity of hEDS and allow clear distinction from HSD. 14,15”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palsson, O. S., Whitehead, W. E., van Tilburg, M. A. L., Chang, L., Chey, W., Crowell, M. D., Keefer, L., Lembo, A. J., Parkman, H. P., Rao, S. S. C., Sperber, A., Spiegel, B., Tack, J., Vanner, S., Walker, L. S., Whorwell, P., & Yang, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Michigan Medicine (US)
  • Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Temple University (US)
  • Augusta University (US)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Kingston General Hospital (CA)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
  • Chinese PLA General Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
Palsson, Olafur S.
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
150
Issue
6
Pages
1481-1491
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2344547018
Cited by
719
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 79 · 2025: 99 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 92 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 10
FWCI
43.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gastroenterology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Keywords
Rome IV criteria, functional gastrointestinal disorders, irritable bowel syndrome, functional constipation, functional dyspepsia, sensitivity and specificity, diagnostic overlap, reproducibility, questionnaire validation, adults

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review