Zsa Zsa Weerts

Rome III versus Rome IV criteria for IBS 43 2 References 1. Lovell RM, Ford AC. Global prevalence of and risk factors for irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;10:712-721.e714. 2. Hungin AP, Whorwell PJ, Tack J, et al. The prevalence, patterns and impact of irritable bowel syndrome: an international survey of 40,000 subjects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003;17:643-650. 3. Drossman DA. The functional gastrointestinal disorders and the Rome III process. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1377-1390. 4. Enck P, Aziz Q, Barbara G, et al. Irritable bowel syndrome. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2016;2:16014. 5. Foundation R. Appendix A: Rome III Diagnostic Criteria for FGIDs. 885-897. 6. Mearin F, Lacy BE, Chang L, et al. Bowel Disorders. Gastroenterology 2016; DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.02.031. 7. Whitehead W, Palsson O. Report on the Rome III Normative Gastrointestinal Symptom Survey. Chapel Hill, NC, 2013. 8. Palsson O, van Tilburg MA, Simren M, et al. Population prevalence of Rome III and Rome IV Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) in the United States (US), Canada and the United Kingdom (UK). In Proceedings of Conference Population prevalence of Rome III and Rome IV Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) in the United States (US), Canada and the United Kingdom (UK). 2016. 9. Whitehead WE, Palsson OS, Simren M. Irritable bowel syndrome: what do the new Rome IV diagnostic guidelines mean for patient management? Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017;11:281-283. 10. Boyce PM, Koloski NA, Talley NJ. Irritable bowel syndrome according to varying diagnostic criteria: are the new Rome II criteria unnecessarily restrictive for research and practice? Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95: 3176-3183. 11. Sperber AD, Shvartzman P, Friger M, et al. A comparative reappraisal of the Rome II and Rome III diagnostic criteria: are we getting closer to the 'true' prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;19:441-447. 12. Park DW, Lee OY, Shim SG, et al. The Differences in Prevalence and Sociodemographic Characteristics of Irritable Bowel Syndrome According to Rome II and Rome III. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2010;16:186-193. 13. Wang AJ, Liao XH, Hu PJ, et al. A comparison between Rome III and Rome II criteria in diagnosing irritable bowel syndrome., Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2007;46:644-647. 14. Ludidi S, Mujagic Z, Jonkers D, et al. Markers for visceral hypersensitivity in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2014;26:1104-1111. 15. Mujagic Z, Ludidi S, Keszthelyi D, et al. Small intestinal permeability is increased in diarrhoea predominant IBS, while alterations in gastroduodenal permeability in all IBS subtypes are largely attributable to confounders. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2014;40:288-297. 16. Mujagic Z, Tigchelaar EF, Zhernakova A, et al. A novel biomarker panel for irritable bowel syndrome and the application in the general population. Sci Rep 2016;6:26420. 17. Longstreth GF, Thompson WG, Chey WD, et al. Functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1480-1491. 18. Svedlund J, Sjodin I, Dotevall,, G. GSRS--a clinical rating scale for gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer disease. Dig Dis Sci 1988;33:129-134. 19. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361-370. 20. Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, et al. The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. An updated literature review. J Psychosom Res 2002;52:69-77. 21. Farivar SS, Cunningham WE, Hays RD. Correlated physical and mental health summary scores for the SF-36 and SF-12 Health Survey, V.I. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007;5:54. 22. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF- 36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993;31:247-263.