Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,079

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score: Development and Validation of a Symptom-Based Scoring System for Bowel Dysfunction After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

Emmertsen, Katrine J., Laurberg, Søren·2012·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a scoring system for bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer, on the basis of symptoms and impact on quality of life (QoL). BACKGROUND: LAR for rectal cancer often results in severe bowel dysfunction (LAR syndrome [LARS]) with incontinence, urgency, and frequent bowel movements. Several studies have investigated functional outcome, but the terminology is inconsistent hereby complicating comparison of results. METHODS: Questionnaires regarding bowel function was sent to all 1143 LAR patients eligible for inclusion identified in the national Colorectal Cancer Database. Associations between items and QoL were computed by binomial regression analyses. The important items were selected and regression analysis was performed to find the adjusted risk ratios. Individual score values were designated items to form the LARS score, which was divided into "no LARS," "minor LARS," and "major LARS." Validity was tested by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Spearman's rank correlation and discriminant validity was tested by Student t tests. RESULTS: A total of 961 patients returned completed questionnaires. The 5 most important items were "incontinence for flatus," "incontinence for liquid stools," "frequency," "clustering," and "urgency." The range (0-42) was divided into 0 to 20 (no LARS), 21 to 29 (minor LARS), and 30 to 42 (major LARS). The score showed good correlation and a high sensitivity (72.54%) and specificity (82.52%) for major LARS. Discriminant validity showed significant differences between groups with and without radiotherapy (P < 0.0001), tumor height more or less than 5 cm (P < 0.0001), and total mesorectal excision/partial mesorectal excision (P = 0.0163). CONCLUSIONS: We have constructed a valid and reliable LARS score correlated to QoL--a simple tool for quick clinical evaluation of the severity of LARS.

Overview

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 · 10.1097/sla.0b013e31824f1c21

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 1,079

Metadata

Authors
Emmertsen, K. J., & Laurberg, S.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2012-05
Volume
255
Issue
5
Pages
922-928
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2140158308
Cited by
1,079
References
14
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score: Development and Validation of a Symptom-Based Scoring System for Bowel Dysfunction After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e31824f1c21
The paper
Emmertsen, K. J., & Laurberg, S. (2012). Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score: Development and Validation of a Symptom-Based Scoring System for Bowel Dysfunction After Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e31824f1c21

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.