Cited by 163Gastrointestinal motility and disordersMicroscopic ColitisInfant Health and Development

AGA clinical practice guideline on the pharmacological management of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation

Open access
Chang, Lin, Sultan, Shahnaz, Lembo, Anthony, Verne, G. Nicholas, Smalley, Walter, Heidelbaugh, Joel J.·2022·Gastroenterology

Abstract

Background & aims Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction associated with significant disease burden. This American Gastroenterological Association guideline is intended to support practitioners in decisions about the use of medications for the pharmacological management of IBS-C and is an update of a prior technical review and guideline.Methods The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The technical review panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients and conducted an evidence review of the following agents: tenapanor, plecanatide, linaclotide, tegaserod, lubiprostone, polyethylene glycol laxatives, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and antispasmodics. The Guideline Panel reviewed the evidence and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations.Conclusions The panel agreed on 9 recommendations for the management of patients with IBS-C. The panel made a strong recommendation for linaclotide (high certainty) and conditional recommendations for tenapanor, plecanatide, tegaserod, and lubiprostone (moderate certainty), polyethylene glycol laxatives, tricyclic antidepressants, and antispasmodics (low certainty). The panel made a conditional recommendation against the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (low certainty).

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.2022.04.016

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • Some probiotics may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

    “Some probiotics may be bene fi cial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but differences in species and strains used, as well as endpoints reported, have hampered attempts to make speci fi c recommendations as to which should be preferred.”

    From Efficacy of Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Limitations and Evidence Gaps section says that an AGA guideline identified evidence gaps concerning probiotics in IBS and called for larger, higher-quality studies. It does not say that some probiotics may be beneficial; searches for probiotic benefits and strain-specific recommendations found no such statement in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [42]42. Longstreth GF, Thompson WG, Chey WD, et al. Func- tional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology 2006; 130:1480-1491.
  2. [50]50. Lefkowitz M, Shi Y, Schmitt C, et al. The 5-HT4 partial agonist, tegaserod, improves abdominal discomfort/pain and normalizes altered bowel function in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:266.
  3. [73]73. Palsson OS, Whitehead WE, van Tilburg MA, et al. Rome IV diagnostic questionnaires and tables for investigators and clinicians. Gastroenterology 2016;150:1481-1491.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chang, L., Sultan, S., Lembo, A., Verne, G. N., Smalley, W., & Heidelbaugh, J. J.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-07
Volume
163
Issue
1
Pages
118-136
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283163096
Cited by
163
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 6
FWCI
27.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gastroenterology (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK099052, DK118959)
  • AbbVie
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Microscopic Colitis
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Infant Health and Development
Keywords
irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, pharmacological management, linaclotide, tenapanor, plecanatide, tegaserod, lubiprostone, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antispasmodic agents, gut-brain axis, evidence-based recommendations
MeSH terms
Lubiprostone, Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic, Constipation, Gastrointestinal Agents, Humans, Parasympatholytics, Polyethylene Glycols, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Laxatives

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