4.7 Article

Community subgroups in dyspepsia and their association with weight loss

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 103, 期 8, 页码 2051-2060

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01935.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: A link between dyspepsia symptoms and weight loss is controversial. We aimed to determine whether or not weight loss is a marker of dyspepsia. METHODS: Independent community-based cross-sectional studies. Subjects were randomly selected from the general population in Sydney, Australia. All subjects completed validated community health surveys. Two distinct data collections were used; the first as a training sample (N = 888) and the second as a validation sample to confirm the findings of the first (N = 2,907). The study was focused on weight loss, which was categorized as (a) any weight loss, (b) substantive weight loss (>= 3 kg), and (c) weight loss expressed as percentage of body weight. RESULTS: All dyspepsia symptoms studied were positively associated with weight loss although the strength of association did vary. Nausea and vomiting were most strongly associated with weight loss as were meal-related complaints such as postprandial fullness. Similarly, clusters formed based on symptoms were strongly differentiated in terms of weight loss with clusters characterized by nausea, vomiting, and early satiety/postprandial fullness reporting 25-30% weight loss prevalence over the previous 3 months compared with around 10% prevalence in clusters characterized by low dyspepsia symptom burden. Weight loss >= 3 kg followed a similar pattern but with a prevalence approximately half that of any weight loss, while weight loss expressed as percentage of body weight followed the same pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Dyspepsia symptoms are clearly and, in some cases, strongly associated with weight loss, both any loss of weight and substantive weight loss. Weight loss should be considered a warning symptom of dyspepsia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据