The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Drug Survival of Drugs Recommended for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Retrospective Observational Study
Abstract
Background: There is limited data on how drugs prescribed for functional bowel disorders are re‐prescribed in clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate drug survival rates of different irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) treatments among patients referred to a gastroenterologist. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted by reviewing medical charts of patients aged 18–50 years, diagnosed with IBS or an unspecified functional intestinal disorder between 2010 and 2018. Drug survival rates for various treatment categories were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves and log‐rank tests. Results: A total of 1528 treatment attempts were recorded in 529 patients, with 883 classified as treatment‐naïve. Simethicones demonstrated significantly higher drug survival compared to bulking agents (p = 0.009). Tricyclic antidepressants (TCA), loperamide, and simethicones all showed superior survival rates compared to osmotic laxatives (p = 0.039, p = 0.025 and p = 0.003, respectively). Additionally, loperamide and simethicones had better survival rates than antispasmodics (p = 0.046 and p = 0.012, respectively). At 60 months, the cumulative drug survival rate was highest for TCA (11%), followed by loperamide (10%) and simethicones (7%), all significantly outperforming bulking agents (1%) (p = 0.002 for TCA vs. bulking agents, p = 0.002 for loperamide vs. bulking agents, and p = 0.006 for simethicones vs. bulking agents). For all treatment‐naïve attempts, the cumulative drug survival at 60 months was 6%. Conclusions: The overall 60‐month drug survival for treatments prescribed in IBS is relatively low, suggesting that the effectiveness of current therapies remains limited. Among the medications studied, simethicone and TCAs demonstrated the best drug survival rates.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“The few new drug classes that have been developed recently have not led to any incremental increase in the likelihood of therapy success [60].”
From Natural Remedies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review of Herbal-Based Therapies (2025) · cites this paper as [60]
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
Oka, P., Parr, H., Barberio, B., Black, C. J., Savarino, E. V., & Ford, A. C. (2020) · The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1016/s2468-1253(20)30217-x · Cited by 882
Mechanisms, evaluation, and management of chronic constipation
Bharucha, A. E., & Lacy, B. E. (2020) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.034 · Cited by 655
Rome criteria and a diagnostic approach to irritable bowel syndrome
Lacy, B., & Patel, N. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm6110099 · Cited by 575 · cited 1×
“symptom onset occurring at least 6 months before the diagnosis [5].”
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.021 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/nmo.14578 · DOI
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.032 · DOI
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.031 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.014 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2022.110809 · DOI
- 10.1002/ueg2.12425 · DOI
- 10.1177/17562848221114558 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41575-023-00794-z · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.05.042 · DOI
- 10.1186/s12876‐019‐0985‐1 · DOI
- 10.3390/jcm7010003 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)01523-4 · DOI
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.04.017 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.04.016 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.2909 · DOI
- Tornblom H., 2023, Nationell riktlinje för funktionell tarmsjukdom
- 10.3892/ijmm.2017.3072 · DOI
- 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000530 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.10.036 · DOI
- 10.1177/2050640618787648 · DOI
- 10.1007/s12325-018-0733-x · DOI
- 10.3748/wjg.15.1548 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0127815 · DOI
- 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001242 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.rgmx.2012.04.002 · DOI
- 10.1185/030079907x182176 · DOI
- 10.21037/tgh.2018.09.11 · DOI
- 10.1111/nmo.13619 · DOI
- 10.1177/2050640615600114 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10620-018-5343-6 · DOI
- 10.1111/nmo.12946 · DOI
- Wilson S., 2004, Prevalence of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Community Survey, British Journal of General Practice, 54, 495
Cited by
Natural Remedies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review of Herbal-Based Therapies
Abalo, R., Gallego-Barceló, P., & Gabbia, D. (2025) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms26199345 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Sandberg‐Janzon, A., & Karling, P.
- Affiliations
- Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine Umeå University Umeå Sweden
- Venue
- Neurogastroenterology & Motility
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2025-04-24
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 10
- ISSN
- 1350-1925
- 1365-2982
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
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
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.
