Cited by 477Gastrointestinal motility and disordersPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsInfant Health and Development

Irritable bowel syndrome in general practice: prevalence, characteristics, and referral

Open access
Thompson, W G, Heaton, K W, Smyth, G T, Smyth, C·2000·Gut

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Little is known about the prevalence, symptoms, diagnosis, attitude, and referral to specialists of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in general practice. This study aimed to determine these characteristics. METHODS: 3111 patients attending 36 general practitioners (GPs) at six varied locations in and near Bristol, UK, were screened to identify those with a gastrointestinal problem. These patients (n=255) and their doctors were given questionnaires. Six months later the case notes were examined to reach criteria based diagnoses of functional bowel disorders. RESULTS: Of 255 patients with a gastrointestinal complaint, 30% were judged to have IBS and 14% other functional disorders. Compared with 100 patients with an “organic” diagnoses, those with IBS were more often women and more often judged by their GP to be polysymptomatic and to have unexplained symptoms. The majority of patients with IBS (58%) were diagnosed as such by the GP; 22% had other functional diagnoses. Conversely, among 54 patients diagnosed as having IBS by the GPs, the criteria based diagnosis was indeed functional in 91%; only one patient had organic disease (proctitis). More patients with IBS than those with organic disease feared cancer. In most some fear remained after the visit to the doctor. On logistic regression analysis, predictors of referral to a specialist (29% referred) were denial of a role for stress, multiple tests, and frequent bowel movements. CONCLUSIONS: Half the patients with gut complaints seen by GPs have functional disorders. These are usually recognised, and few patients are referred. In IBS, cancer fears often remain, suggesting unconfident diagnosis or inadequate explanation.

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 · 10.1136/gut.46.1.78

Cites

23 of 23 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?

  • Lower gastrointestinal symptoms frequently prompt people to present to primary care, accounting for approximately 1 in 12 of all consultations.

    “Nevertheless, lower gastrointestinal symptoms frequently prompt people to present to primary care, 81 accounting for approximately 1 in 12 of all consultations.82”

    From British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the management of irritable bowel syndrome (2021) · cites this paper as [82]

    The Discussion states that gastrointestinal problems account for about one in 12 primary-care consultations. The Screening and Demographics section likewise reports gastrointestinal complaints in 8.2% of screened patients. Neither passage limits that figure to lower gastrointestinal symptoms, so the claim is narrower than the source supports. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most patients with IBS are diagnosed and managed by general practitioners in community settings and are never referred to secondary care, even if they have ongoing troublesome symptoms.

    “Most patients with IBS are diagnosed and managed by general practitioners in community settings and are never referred to secondary care, even if they have ongoing troublesome symptoms.82”

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: 1

  1. [9]9. Thompson WG, Heaton KW, Smyth GT, et al. Gut complaints in general practice: implications for the currcu- lum [abstract]. Gastroenterology 1997;112:A46.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thompson, W. G., Heaton, K. W., Smyth, G. T., & Smyth, C.
Affiliations
University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Thompson, W G
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2000-01-01
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
78-82
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2137007351
Cited by
477
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 22
FWCI
25.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gut (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Infant Health and Development
Keywords
irritable bowel syndrome, functional bowel disorders, general practice, prevalence, specialist referral, fear of cancer, diagnostic criteria, proctitis
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude to Health, Colonic Diseases, Functional, England, Family Practice, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Referral and Consultation, Cohort Studies, Prevalence

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