Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33413140›Full record

ArticleBMC gastroenterology2021

The level and prevalence of depression and anxiety among patients with different subtypes of irritable bowel syndrome: a network meta-analysis.

Zhichao Hu, Meixuan Li, Liang Yao, Yinshu Wang, Enkang Wang, Jianye Yuan, Fengyun Wang, Kehu Yang, Zhaoxiang Bian, Linda L D Zhong

Open access · goldAbstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cost-of-Illness of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Zhichao HuHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Center, School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, 7 Baptist University Road, Kowloon, 999077, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Meixuan LiEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China.
Liang YaoDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Yinshu WangInstitute of Digestive Diseases, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Enkang WangInstitute of Digestive Diseases, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Jianye YuanInstitute of Digestive Diseases, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Fengyun WangXiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medicinal Sciences, Beijing, 100091, China.
Kehu YangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China.
Zhaoxiang BianHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Center, School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, 7 Baptist University Road, Kowloon, 999077, Hong Kong SAR, China. bzxiang@hkbu.edu.hk.
Linda L D ZhongHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Center, School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, 7 Baptist University Road, Kowloon, 999077, Hong Kong SAR, China. ldzhong@hkbu.edu.hk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3877-1914
Hong Kong Baptist University · HKShanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNLanzhou University · CNImpact · CAXiyuan Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a very common functional bowel disorder. However, the difference of depression and anxiety comorbidities among different IBS subtypes is still not well evaluated. This study aims to investigate the difference in the level and prevalence of depression and anxiety among healthy controls and patients with different subtypes of IBS.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library were searched systematically until August 17, 2020. Studies that investigated depression and/or anxiety levels or prevalence among different IBS-subtype patients measured at baseline or the same point were included. Network meta-analysis was conducted to analyze standardized mean difference (SMD) of anxiety and depression levels, and single arm meta-analysis was performed for prevalence of anxiety and depression among different IBS subtypes.

resultsEighteen studies involving 7095 participants were included. Network meta-analyses results showed healthy controls had a lower level of depression than IBS with mixed symptoms of constipation and diarrhea (IBS-M) [SMD =  - 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.21,  - 0.92], IBS with constipation (IBS-C) (SMD =  - 1.53; 95% CI - 2.13,  - 0.93) and IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D)(SMD =  - 1.41; 95% CI - 1.97,  - 0.85), while no significant difference was found between IBS unclassified (IBS-U) and healthy controls (SMD =  - 0.58; 95% CI  - 2.15, 1.00). There was also no significant difference in the level of depression among different IBS subtypes patients. The results of anxiety were similar to depression. Ranking probability showed that IBS-M was associated with the highest level of depression and anxiety symptoms, followed by IBS-C/IBS-D and IBS-U. Single-arm meta-analysis showed IBS-C had the highest prevalence of depression (38%) and anxiety (40%), followed by IBS-D, IBS-M and IBS-U.

conclusionThe results indicated that IBS-M was more likely to be associated with a higher level of depression and anxiety, and the prevalence of depression and anxiety in IBS-C was highest. The psychological screening and appropriate psychotherapy are needed for patients with IBS-C, IBS-D and IBS-M instead of IBS-U.

Indexed as

Irritable Bowel SyndromeAnxietyDepressionHumansPrevalenceAnxietyDepressionIrritable bowel syndromeMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID33413140
PMCPMC7791666
OpenAlexW3119679721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.