14781-koppen

53 Prevalence of functional defecation disorders 1 COCHRANE LIBRARY ID Search #1 MeSH descriptor: [Constipation] explode all trees #2 MeSH descriptor: [Fecal Impaction] explode all trees #3 MeSH descriptor: [Fecal Incontinence] explode all trees #4 MeSH descriptor: [Encopresis] explode all trees #5 constipat* or obstipat* or coprostasis or soiling or encopresis or fecal incontin* or fecal impaction or faecal incontin* or faecal impaction or fnrfi or functional defecation disorder* or functional defaecation disorder* or functional gastrointestinal disorder*:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #6 #1 or #2 or #3 or #4 or #5 #7 MeSH descriptor: [Child] explode all trees #8 MeSH descriptor: [Infant] explode all trees #9 MeSH descriptor: [Adolescent] explode all trees #10 MeSH descriptor: [Pediatrics] explode all trees #11 child* or infant* or infancy or newborn* or neonat* or baby or babies or preschool or pre school or pubescen* or teen* or adolescen* or puber* or prepubert* or juvenil* or p?ediatric* or youth* or schoolchild* or school age* or schoolage* or preschool or pre-school or elementary school or high school* or highschool* or kindergar* or boy or boys or girl* or minors or underag* or under ag* or kid or kids or toddler*:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #12 #7 or #8 or #9 or #10 or #11 #13 MeSH descriptor: [Epidemiology] explode all trees #14 MeSH descriptor: [Prevalence] explode all trees #15 qpgs or rome III or rome iv or epidemiolog* or prevalen*:ti,ab,kw (Word variations have been searched) #16 #13 or #14 or #15 #17 #6 and #12 and #16 Data collection: country where the study was performed, study design, type of population and sampling strategy, sample size, age range, sex distribution, method of data collection, definition of FDDs, overall prevalence of FC and FNRFI. If available, prevalence distributions according to sex, age and geographical location and details on factors associated with FDDs (e.g., environmental, lifestyle and psychosocial factors). Quality assessment: (1) Is the method of subject selection described and appropriate? (2) Are subject characteristics sufficiently described, i.e. do they match the target population regarding to gender and age? (3) Are FDDs diagnosed according to the Rome III or Rome IV criteria? (4) Are the survey instruments reliable and valid? (5) Are the analytic methods described/justified and appropriate? (6) Were the results reported in sufficient detail? Each question was scored on a 3-point scale (no (0), partial (1) or yes (2)) with higher scores representing better methodological quality.