Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are common in children of all ages and comprise of a wide range of conditions related to the gastrointestinal tract that cannot be attributed to structural or biochemical abnormalities. FGIDs are diagnosed according to the symptom-based Rome criteria. Areas covered: In 2016, the revised pediatric Rome IV criteria were published, these revised criteria are discussed in this review article. For the youngest age group (neonates/toddlers), the criteria for infant colic have undergone the most notable revisions. The most prominent changes in Rome IV were made in the criteria for children/adolescents, with the definition of two new FGIDs (functional nausea and functional vomiting) and the restructuring of the criteria for functional abdominal pain disorders, including the definition of FGID subtypes for functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome. Expert commentary: Overall, the Rome IV have been refined and are expected to improve the process of diagnosing FGIDs in the pediatric population and to better facilitate the healthcare professional in distinguishing different clinical entities. These changes will likely benefit future research and clinical care.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2023.
All research outputs
#9,622,311
of 34,492,055 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
#266
of 1,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,903
of 468,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
#13
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,492,055 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 468,497 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
