GastroAGI Logo
OverviewBlogsAbout
Trending TopicsDaily BriefConference

116 calculators match

Most used

21
MELD-NaAssesses the severity of chronic liver diseaseChild-Pugh ScoreAssesses the prognosis of chronic liver disease, mainly cirrhosisFIB-4 IndexLiver fibrosis scoring indexAPRIAST to platelet ratio — liver fibrosisMaddrey's DFAlcoholic hepatitis severityGlasgow-BlatchfordUpper GI bleed risk stratificationGAHSGlasgow alcoholic hepatitis scoreMontreal IBDIBD classification — CD & UCMayo ScoreUlcerative colitis activityBISAP ScoreBedside index for severity of pancreatitisCLIF-SOFAOrgan failure scoring in cirrhosisAlcohol ContentStandard drinks & alcohol grams calculatorAARC-ACLFAcute-on-chronic liver failure gradePELD / CR ScorePediatric end-stage liver diseaseHarvey-BradshawCrohn's disease activity indexCTSICT severity index — pancreatitisRockall ScoreGI bleed rebleeding & mortality riskCAGEAlcohol use disorder screening (4 questions)MELD 3.0Updated MELD — sex-inclusive formulaAUDIT ScoreAlcohol use disorders identification testVOCAL-Penn ScorePost-operative mortality risk in cirrhosis surgery

Liver & Cirrhosis

17
ALBI GradeAlbumin-bilirubin liver function grade in HCCUKELD ScoreUK model for end-stage liver diseaseMELD-XIMELD excluding INR — for anticoagulated patientsWest Haven CriteriaHepatic encephalopathy gradingMilan CriteriaLiver transplant eligibility in hepatocellular carcinomaLI-RADS v2018 (CT/MRI)Liver observation category from size, APHE and major featuresBCLC StagingHepatocellular carcinoma stage and treatment allocationSimplified AIH CriteriaSimplified criteria for autoimmune hepatitisRevised Original AIH ScoreIAIHG 1999 comprehensive autoimmune hepatitis scoreSAAGSerum-ascites albumin gradient — cause of ascitesR FactorHepatocellular vs cholestatic pattern in liver injuryCLIF-C ACLFMortality prediction in acute-on-chronic liver failureKing's College CriteriaTransplant criteria in acute liver failureGALAD ScoreHCC detection from gender, age, AFP-L3, AFP and DCPMetroticket 2.0AFP-adjusted up-to-seven for HCC transplant eligibilityRUCAMCausality in drug- and herb-induced liver injuryBaveno VII CriteriacACLD, CSPH and sparing screening endoscopy

Fibrosis & MASLD

8
NAFLD Fibrosis ScoreAdvanced fibrosis probability in MASLD/NAFLDBARD ScoreBMI, AST/ALT ratio, diabetes — MASLD fibrosisFatty Liver IndexPredicts hepatic steatosis from routine labsFibrotic NASH Index (FNI)At-risk NASH probability from AST, HbA1c and HDLNAFLD Activity Score (NAS)Histologic activity grade — steatosis, inflammation, ballooningMEFIB IndexMRE + FIB-4 rule for significant fibrosis (≥F2) in MASLDFAST ScoreFibroScan-AST — at-risk NASH from LSM, CAP and ASTSAFE ScoreSteatosis-Associated Fibrosis Estimator for MASLD in primary care

Pancreas & Biliary

8
Ranson's CriteriaAcute pancreatitis severity at 48 hoursGlasgow-Imrie CriteriaAcute pancreatitis severity — the PANCREAS criteriaHAPSHarmless acute pancreatitis scoreTokyo Guidelines — CholangitisTG18 diagnosis and severity grade for acute cholangitisTokyo Guidelines — CholecystitisTG18 diagnosis and severity grade for acute cholecystitisBiliary Pain (Rome IV)Rome IV — defining biliary-type pain before interventionFunctional Pancreatic SODRome IV — pancreatic sphincter of Oddi disorderRevised Atlanta ClassificationAcute pancreatitis severity — mild, moderately severe, severe

IBD

9
Truelove & Witts CriteriaAcute severe ulcerative colitis — admission decisionUCEISUlcerative colitis endoscopic index of severitySCCAISimple clinical colitis activity index — symptoms onlyCDAICrohn's disease activity index — the trial standardSES-CDEndoscopic severity in Crohn's diseasePUCAIPaediatric ulcerative colitis activity indexTravis (Oxford) CriteriaDay 3 colectomy risk in acute severe ulcerative colitisHo IndexDay 3 steroid failure risk in acute severe ulcerative colitisRutgeerts ScorePostoperative Crohn's recurrence at ileocolonoscopy

GI Bleeding

7
EVendo ScorePredicts oesophageal varices needing treatmentForrest ClassificationPeptic ulcer bleeding — rebleeding risk at endoscopyAIMS65 ScoreUpper GI bleed mortality — five bedside criteriaOakland ScoreSafe-discharge risk for acute lower GI bleedingABC ScoreAge, blood tests, comorbidities — GI bleed mortalitySarin ClassificationEndoscopic classification of gastric varicesEGUS (Gastric Ulcer)Malignancy risk in a gastric ulcer, and who needs repeat endoscopy

Alcohol

2
ABIC ScoreAge, bilirubin, INR, creatinine — alcoholic hepatitisLille ModelSteroid response at day 7 in alcoholic hepatitis

Upper GI

4
Chicago Classification v4.0Oesophageal motility pattern from high-resolution manometryLA Classification (Oesophagitis)Los Angeles grade A–D for erosive oesophagitisPrague C & M CriteriaCircumferential and maximal extent of Barrett's oesophagusEREFS (Eosinophilic Oesophagitis)Endoscopic reference score — oedema, rings, exudates, furrows, stricture

Colorectal

3
Boston Bowel Prep ScaleColonoscopy preparation adequacy by segmentStool Osmotic GapOsmotic vs secretory diarrhoea from stool electrolytesATLAS Score (C. difficile)Predicted response to therapy in Clostridioides difficile infection

Functional GI

37
Bristol Stool ScaleStool form types 1–7 and colonic transitRome IV Criteria for IBSIrritable bowel syndrome diagnosis and subtypeFunctional ConstipationRome IV — two of six items, IBS excludedOpioid-Induced ConstipationRome IV — constipation tied to opioid therapyFunctional DiarrhoeaRome IV — loose stools without predominant painFunctional Bloating / DistensionRome IV — bloating without other bowel disorder criteriaUnspecified Functional Bowel DisorderRome IV — bowel symptoms fitting no other categoryCentrally Mediated Abdominal Pain (CAPS)Rome IV — continuous pain unrelated to gut eventsNarcotic Bowel SyndromeRome IV — opioid-induced hyperalgesia of the gutFaecal Incontinence (Rome IV)Rome IV — the criteria, and why nobody is askedFunctional Anorectal PainLevator ani, unspecified pain and proctalgia fugaxFunctional Defecation DisordersRome IV — dyssynergia and inadequate propulsionInfant RegurgitationRome IV — the happy spitter, and the alarm features that rule it outInfant ColicRome IV — recurrent unexplained crying in a well infant under 5 monthsInfant DyscheziaRome IV — straining before a soft stool, and why not to intervenePaediatric Functional ConstipationRome IV — two of six over one month, with overflow soiling as a criterionToddler's DiarrhoeaRome IV functional diarrhoea of childhood — painless, thriving childPaediatric Cyclic Vomiting SyndromeRome IV — both age bands, with different criteria for eachPaediatric Rumination SyndromeRome IV — infant and child/adolescent criteriaFunctional Nausea & Vomiting (Children)Rome IV — two separate disorders that can be met togetherAerophagiaRome IV — distension that increases through the dayPaediatric Functional DyspepsiaRome IV — four times a month, with PDS and EPS subtypingPaediatric Irritable Bowel SyndromeRome IV — plus the constipation clause clinicians missAbdominal MigraineRome IV — stereotypical incapacitating episodes weeks apartFunctional Abdominal Pain — NOSRome IV — the residual category, reached after the other threeNonretentive Faecal IncontinenceRome IV — soiling without retention, where laxatives make it worseFunctional DyspepsiaRome IV — with PDS and EPS subtypingRumination SyndromeRome IV — effortless regurgitation without retchingCyclic Vomiting SyndromeRome IV — stereotypical episodic vomitingCannabinoid HyperemesisRome IV — CVS pattern relieved by cannabis cessationChronic Nausea & VomitingRome IV — chronic nausea and vomiting syndromeBelching DisordersRome IV — supragastric vs gastric belchingFunctional HeartburnRome IV — heartburn with normal acid exposureReflux HypersensitivityRome IV — normal acid exposure, positive symptom associationFunctional Chest PainRome IV — non-cardiac, non-reflux chest painGlobusRome IV — painless lump-in-throat sensationFunctional DysphagiaRome IV — dysphagia with normal endoscopy and manometry
  1. Calculators
  2. /
  3. Bristol Stool Scale
Functional GI

Bristol Stool Scale

Stool form types 1–7 and colonic transit

A descriptive scale, not a score. Stool form correlates with colonic transit time, which is why it is used to subtype irritable bowel syndrome and to judge response to laxatives.

When to use
Use it whenever bowel habit is part of the history: assessing constipation or diarrhoea, subtyping irritable bowel syndrome under Rome IV, titrating laxatives or antidiarrhoeals, monitoring response in inflammatory bowel disease, and in bowel-preparation instructions before colonoscopy. It is most useful recorded prospectively over one to two weeks rather than asked about retrospectively, because what people remember about their bowels is far less reliable than what they write down at the time.
Why use it
Because 'constipation' and 'diarrhoea' mean different things to different people, and asking the question directly produces answers that cannot be compared between visits or between patients. Some people describe daily soft stool as constipation because they expect two; others describe going twice a week as normal. A seven-point scale with pictures and physical descriptions removes most of that ambiguity, which is why it appears in trial endpoints, in the Rome IV subtyping rules, and in bowel-preparation research. It also converts a socially awkward conversation into pointing at a chart, which measurably improves the quality of the history.
Formula, evidence and interpretation

About the Bristol Stool Form Scale

The Bristol Stool Form Scale sorts stool into seven types, from separate hard lumps (type 1) to entirely liquid (type 7). Types 1 and 2 indicate constipation and slow colonic transit, types 3 and 4 are normal, and types 6 and 7 indicate diarrhoea and rapid transit. It was developed in Bristol in the 1990s as a way to measure something patients describe inconsistently, and it works because stool form tracks how long the stool has spent in the colon — the longer the transit, the more water is absorbed and the harder the result.

On this page

  • Formula
  • Interpreting the result
  • Inputs
  • What it returns
  • How it is calculated
  • Facts & figures
  • Evidence
  • How it compares
  • Pearls & pitfalls
  • Critical actions
  • Why it exists
  • About the creator
  • Limitations
  • If you are the patient
  • FAQ
  • Related calculators
  • References

Formula

No calculation — the scale is an ordinal description of stool form, matched by inspection.
Type 1–2
Hard lumps and lumpy sausage. Prolonged colonic transit, so more water has been absorbed.
Type 3–4
Cracked sausage and smooth sausage. Normal transit; type 4 is often described as the ideal.
Type 5–7
Soft blobs through to entirely liquid. Progressively faster transit, so less water has been absorbed.
  • The scale is ordinal, not interval: the difference between types 1 and 2 is not the same quantity as between 6 and 7, so averaging Bristol types across a week is not meaningful. Report the proportion of stools in each band instead.
  • It measures form, not frequency or volume. A patient can pass type 4 stool twice a day or twice a week, and the scale says nothing about which.

Interpreting the result

Read the distribution, not the reading. A patient reporting mostly type 4 with an occasional type 6 is different from one alternating between 1 and 7, and only the second is describing the mixed pattern that Rome IV calls IBS-M. In constipation, the useful target of treatment is types 3–4 rather than a particular frequency, because form is what patients actually experience as difficulty. And a genuine change in a stable pattern matters more than the absolute type: a lifelong type 2 is far less concerning than a new type 6 in someone who has always been type 4.

ScoreBandWhat it meansAction
Type 1ConstipationSeparate hard lumps, like nuts. Markedly slow transitAssess and treat constipation; check for red flags
Type 2ConstipationSausage-shaped but lumpy. Slow transitFibre, fluid, activity; review constipating drugs
Type 3NormalSausage-shaped with surface cracksNo action needed
Type 4NormalSmooth, soft sausage or snake — often called idealNo action needed; the usual treatment target
Type 5Tending to looseSoft blobs with clear-cut edges, passed easilyOften normal; may indicate lacking fibre
Type 6DiarrhoeaFluffy pieces with ragged edges, mushy. Rapid transitAssess for infective, inflammatory or malabsorptive cause
Type 7DiarrhoeaWatery, no solid pieces, entirely liquidAs above, plus assess hydration

What the Bristol Stool Scale needs (1 inputs)

Stool form (type 1–7)
The form of the stool as passed, matched against the seven descriptions. Where a patient's stools vary, what matters clinically is the distribution across a period rather than the single worst or most recent one.

Units. No units — the scale is a set of seven descriptive categories, numbered 1 to 7. The numbers are labels for the categories, not measurements, so a type 6 is not 'twice as loose' as a type 3.

What it returns

Bristol type (1–7)
The matched type, with the transit-time and clinical interpretation attached.
Category
Constipation (1–2), normal (3–4), tending to loose (5), or diarrhoea (6–7).

How it is calculated

The scale is a proxy for colonic transit time. Water absorption in the colon is time-dependent, so a stool that has moved through slowly arrives dry and fragmented, and one that has moved through quickly arrives loose or liquid. Lewis and Heaton established this relationship directly, by altering transit time with senna and loperamide and observing that stool form changed with it — which is why the scale is a measurement rather than just a vocabulary. That also sets its limits: anything that changes stool water for reasons other than transit, such as an osmotic load or steatorrhoea, will move the type without the transit time having changed.

Facts & figures

How Bristol type maps onto Rome IV irritable bowel syndrome subtypes
SubtypeRulePredominant types
IBS-CMore than 25% of bowel movements type 1–2, and 25% or less type 6–71–2
IBS-DMore than 25% type 6–7, and 25% or less type 1–26–7
IBS-MMore than 25% of both type 1–2 and type 6–7Both extremes
IBS-UMeets IBS criteria but neither pattern predominatesVariable

Assessed only on days with at least one abnormal bowel movement. This is why prospective recording matters — the rule is a proportion, and proportions cannot be recalled accurately.

Evidence

Derivation — Bristol, transit-time correlation

1997

Developed at the University of Bristol and published in 1997, establishing that stool form corresponds to intestinal transit time. Transit was manipulated pharmacologically and stool form changed accordingly, which is what makes the scale a proxy measurement rather than a naming convention.

Stool form correlated with measured whole-gut transit time, supporting its use as a surrogate where formal transit studies are impractical.

Validation — healthy adults and diarrhoea-predominant IBS

2016

Prospective assessment of validity and reliability in healthy adults and in patients with diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, published in Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics in 2016.

Supported the scale's reliability for recording stool form, while noting that agreement is best when patients record at the time of the bowel movement rather than recalling it later.

How it compares

Bristol Stool Scale vs Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome

They work together rather than competing: Rome IV decides whether it is irritable bowel syndrome, and Bristol decides which subtype — you cannot complete the Rome IV subtyping step without stool form.

Rome IV sets the diagnostic criteria: recurrent abdominal pain at least one day a week for three months, with at least two of three pain characteristics, six months since onset. Once those are met, the subtype comes from the proportion of bowel movements at Bristol types 1–2 versus 6–7 on days with abnormal habit. So Bristol is not an alternative to Rome IV, it is a component of it.

Open the Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome calculator →

Bristol Stool Scale vs Stool frequency alone

Form predicts colonic transit better than frequency does, which is why the scale exists — someone opening their bowels daily can still be constipated.

Frequency is the more intuitive measure and the one patients volunteer, but it is a poor proxy for transit and a poor treatment target. A patient passing type 1–2 stool every day is straining daily and experiencing constipation, and a frequency-based assessment records them as normal. The pair together — form and frequency — is more informative than either alone.

Pearls & pitfalls

  • It measures form only. Frequency, volume, urgency, blood and mucus all matter clinically and none of them appear on the scale.
  • One reading is close to useless. The clinically meaningful output is the distribution over one to two weeks, recorded prospectively.
  • Type 4 is the usual treatment target in constipation, not a particular number of bowel movements per week — form is what patients experience as difficulty.
  • The scale is ordinal, so averaging types is not valid. A patient alternating 1 and 7 does not have an average of type 4; they have a mixed pattern.
  • A new change in a previously stable pattern is more significant than the absolute type, particularly over the age of 50.
  • Recall is unreliable. Patients asked to remember last week's stool form agree with their own contemporaneous records much less well than clinicians expect.
  • Types 6–7 are not automatically functional. Bile-acid diarrhoea, coeliac disease, microscopic colitis, pancreatic insufficiency and inflammatory bowel disease all present this way and all have specific treatments.

Critical actions

  • Screen for alarm features regardless of type: onset over 50, rectal bleeding, unexplained weight loss, nocturnal symptoms, iron-deficiency anaemia, a family history of colorectal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease, or a palpable mass.
  • For persistent types 6–7, check faecal calprotectin and coeliac serology as a minimum, and consider bile-acid malabsorption — it is common and specifically treatable.
  • For persistent types 1–2, review every drug the patient takes: opioids, anticholinergics, calcium-channel blockers and iron are common culprits.
  • Ask for a prospective two-week record before subtyping irritable bowel syndrome, rather than assigning a subtype from a retrospective description.
  • Do not treat a stool chart in isolation — the scale supports a history, it does not replace one.

Why this score exists

The scale came out of Ken Heaton's group at Bristol, and its purpose was measurement rather than education: the team needed a way to quantify stool form for transit-time research, because the words patients and clinicians used were not comparable. The seven categories were chosen to span the range that pharmacological manipulation of transit actually produced. Its later career as a patient-facing chart on clinic walls was a side effect of it being unusually easy to understand, not the original design goal — which is worth knowing, because it explains why the scale says nothing about frequency, volume, blood or urgency. Those were never what it was built to measure.

About the creator

  • Stephen J. Lewis

    First author, 1997 scale validation

    Published the seven-type stool form scale as a surrogate measure of colonic transit time.

  • Kenneth W. Heaton

    Senior author

    Co-developed the scale at the University of Bristol, from which it takes its name.

Limitations

  • Captures form only, so it cannot substitute for a full bowel history.
  • Ordinal rather than interval, so types cannot be averaged and parametric statistics on raw types are inappropriate.
  • Retrospective reporting is substantially less reliable than contemporaneous recording, which limits its accuracy in ordinary consultations.
  • Validated principally in adults; paediatric use generally relies on modified versions with age-appropriate images.
  • Anything that changes stool water independently of transit — osmotic laxatives, steatorrhoea, high-volume secretory diarrhoea — moves the type without the transit time having changed, so the transit inference breaks down.
  • Cultural and dietary differences in baseline stool form mean the 'normal' band is a population statement, not an individual one.

If you are the patient

The Bristol Stool Chart is a set of seven pictures used to describe what your stool looks like, so that you and your doctor mean the same thing. Types 1 and 2 are hard and lumpy and mean things are moving through slowly — that is constipation. Types 3 and 4 are smooth and soft and are considered normal, with type 4 often called ideal. Types 5, 6 and 7 get progressively looser, and 6 and 7 mean diarrhoea. It is genuinely useful to keep a note for a week or two of which type you have each time, because doctors find that far more reliable than trying to remember. Two things worth telling your doctor about rather than waiting: any lasting change from what is normal for you, and any blood, unexplained weight loss, or being woken at night by your bowels.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Bristol Stool Scale?#

It is a seven-point scale describing the form of stool, from type 1 (separate hard lumps) to type 7 (entirely liquid). It was developed at the University of Bristol and published in 1997 as a way to measure stool form reliably, because it corresponds to how long the stool has spent in the colon.

Which Bristol stool type is healthy?#

Types 3 and 4 are considered normal, and type 4 — a smooth, soft sausage — is often described as ideal. Type 5 is frequently normal too. Types 1 and 2 indicate constipation and types 6 and 7 indicate diarrhoea.

What does Bristol type 6 mean?#

Type 6 is mushy stool in fluffy pieces with ragged edges, indicating rapid colonic transit — diarrhoea. Persisting type 6 should not be assumed to be functional: coeliac disease, bile-acid malabsorption, microscopic colitis, pancreatic insufficiency and inflammatory bowel disease all present this way and each has a specific treatment.

How is the Bristol Stool Scale used to diagnose IBS?#

It supplies the subtyping step of the Rome IV criteria. Once the Rome IV symptom criteria for irritable bowel syndrome are met, the subtype is assigned from the proportion of bowel movements at types 1–2 versus 6–7 on days with an abnormal bowel habit: more than 25% at 1–2 gives IBS-C, more than 25% at 6–7 gives IBS-D, more than 25% of both gives IBS-M.

Can you be constipated and still go every day?#

Yes, and this is one of the main reasons the scale is useful. Constipation is about difficulty and stool form as much as frequency. Someone passing type 1 or 2 stool daily is straining every day and is constipated, even though a frequency-based assessment would record them as normal.

Should I record my stool type or just remember it?#

Record it. Validation work found that agreement is considerably better when patients note the type at the time of the bowel movement than when they recall it afterwards. Since the Rome IV subtyping rule is a proportion over time, a prospective one- to two-week record is what makes it usable.

Is the Bristol Stool Scale valid in children?#

The original scale was developed and validated in adults. Modified versions with age-appropriate images exist for paediatric use, and those are what should be used rather than the adult chart.

Does the Bristol type tell you the cause of diarrhoea?#

No. It describes the consistency and implies fast transit, but it does not distinguish an infection from coeliac disease, bile-acid malabsorption, inflammatory bowel disease or a functional disorder. It is the starting point of the assessment, not the conclusion.

Related calculators

  • Stool Osmotic Gap — Osmotic vs secretory diarrhoea from stool electrolytes
  • Rome IV Criteria for IBS — Irritable bowel syndrome diagnosis and subtype
  • SCCAI — Simple clinical colitis activity index — symptoms only
  • Boston Bowel Prep Scale — Colonoscopy preparation adequacy by segment
  • Functional Constipation — Rome IV — two of six items, IBS excluded

References

Original / primary reference

  1. Lewis SJ, Heaton KW. Stool form scale as a useful guide to intestinal transit time. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1997;32(9):920-924.

Validation

  1. Blake MR, Raker JM, Whelan K. Validity and reliability of the Bristol Stool Form Scale in healthy adults and patients with diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016;44(7):693-703.

Clinical practice guidelines

  1. Lacy BE, Mearin F, Chang L, et al. Bowel Disorders. Gastroenterology. 2016;150(6):1393-1407 (Rome IV, including the stool-form subtyping rules).
  2. Lacy BE, Pimentel M, Brenner DM, et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021;116(1):17-44.

Last updated July 29, 2026. Clinical knowledge base written and curated by GastroAGI Team from primary medical literature.

Written from primary literature and not yet independently clinically reviewed.

For use by qualified healthcare professionals. This calculator supports clinical judgement and does not replace it.