The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Recurrent Abdominal Pains: A Field Survey of 1,000 School Children
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE To construct and validate a questionnaire for use in diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). DESIGN All participants completed a questionnaire, which asked clinical questions designed to assist in the diagnosis of PCOS, before their appointments with an endocrinologist. Following completion of the questionnaire, the endocrinologist (blinded to the answers) made or excluded a diagnosis of PCOS using clinical criteria and biochemical data as indicated. Questions were then evaluated for their power to predict PCOS, and a model was constructed using the most reliable items to establish a system to predict a diagnosis of PCOS. SETTING An outpatient reproductive endocrinology clinic in Calgary, Alta. PARTICIPANTS Adult women patients who had been referred to the clinic. Fifty patients with PCOS and 50 patients without PCOS were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Demographic information, medical history, related diagnoses, menstrual history, and fertility history. RESULTS A history of infrequent menses, hirsutism, obesity, and acne were strongly predictive of a diagnosis of PCOS, whereas a history of failed pregnancy attempts was not useful. A history of nipple discharge outside of pregnancy strongly predicted no diagnosis of PCOS. We constructed a 4-item questionnaire for use in diagnosis of PCOS; the questionnaire yielded a sensitivity of 85% and a specificity of 85% on multivariate logistic regression and a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 94% using the 4-item questionnaire. Predictive accuracy was validated using a second sample of 117 patients, in addition to internal validation using bootstrap analysis. CONCLUSION We have constructed a simple clinical tool to help diagnose PCOS. This questionnaire can be easily incorporated into family physicians’ busy practices.
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.
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
Cited by
The epidemiology of chronic pain in children and adolescents revisited: A systematic review
King, S., Chambers, C. T., Huguet, A., MacNevin, R. C., McGrath, P. J., Parker, L., & MacDonald, A. J. (2011) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2011.07.016 · Cited by 1,688
Gender variations in clinical pain experience
Unruh, A. M. (1996) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(95)00214-6 · Cited by 1,550
Pain in children and adolescents: a common experience
Perquin, C. W., Hazebroek-Kampschreur, A. A. J. M., Hunfeld, J. A. M., Bohnen, A. M., van Suijlekom-Smit, L. W. A., Passchier, J., & van der Wouden, J. C. (2000) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00269-4 · Cited by 1,114
Psychosocial Aspects of the Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders
Levy, R. L., Olden, K. W., Naliboff, B. D., Bradley, L. A., Francisconi, C., Drossman, D. A., & Creed, F. (2006) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.11.057 · Cited by 776
Abdominal pain and irritable bowel syndrome in adolescents: a community-based study
Hyams, J. S., Burke, G., Davis, P. M., Rzepski, B., & Andrulonis, P. A. (1996) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3476(96)70246-9 · Cited by 532
Metadata
- Authors
- Apley, J., & Naish, N.
- Venue
- Archives of Disease in Childhood
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1958-04-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 168
- Pages
- 165-170
- ISSN
- 0003-9888 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2044
- OpenAlex
- W1980364865
- Cited by
- 793
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Recurrent Abdominal Pains: A Field Survey of 1,000 School Children. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/adc.33.168.165
- The paper
- Apley, J., & Naish, N. (1958). Recurrent Abdominal Pains: A Field Survey of 1,000 School Children. Archives of Disease in Childhood. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.33.168.165
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.