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. Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia
Functional GI

Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia

Rome IV — four times a month, with PDS and EPS subtyping

Four times a month is a much lower bar than the adult three days a week, which reflects how disruptive even intermittent symptoms are to schooling.

One of the two postprandial distress syndrome symptoms.

Rome IV describes this as preventing the child from finishing a regular meal.

The defecation qualifier separates dyspepsia from IBS, where pain is related to bowel actions.

The paediatric criteria differ from the adult ones in two ways worth knowing: four times a month for two months rather than three days a week for three months, and epigastric pain is qualified as not associated with defecation.

When to use
Use it in a child or adolescent with recurrent upper abdominal symptoms once alarm features have been considered. The most valuable moment to apply it is before endoscopy rather than after: the criteria are designed to support a positive diagnosis without it, and in the absence of alarm features endoscopy in this group has a very low diagnostic yield. Applying them explicitly is also what allows the conversation to move on, which matters because school absence accumulates while the work-up runs.
Why use it
Because the default pathway for a child with upper abdominal pain — endoscopy, Helicobacter testing, acid suppression, repeat as required — has a poor yield and a real cost. Endoscopy in children without alarm features rarely changes management, and the role of Helicobacter pylori in paediatric dyspepsia is far weaker than in adults, so testing frequently generates a positive result that explains nothing and a treatment that does not help. Meanwhile the factors that actually predict outcome — school attendance, anxiety, and how confidently the diagnosis was given — go unaddressed. The lower frequency threshold is itself the point: Rome IV set it at four times a month because symptoms far below the adult bar are already disrupting a child's schooling.
Formula, evidence and interpretation

About the Rome IV Criteria for Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia

One or more bothersome symptoms — postprandial fullness, early satiation, or epigastric pain or burning not associated with defecation — occurring at least four times a month for at least two months, with other medical conditions excluded after appropriate evaluation. Two differences from the adult criteria are worth holding onto. The frequency bar is much lower: four times a month rather than three days a week for three months. And epigastric pain is explicitly qualified as not associated with defecation, which is how Rome IV keeps dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome apart in a population where the two overlap heavily. Subtyping into postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome follows the same logic as in adults, and the two frequently coexist.

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

Paediatric functional dyspepsia = bothersome symptoms ≥ 4×/month for ≥ 2 months AND ≥ 1 of: postprandial fullness | early satiation | epigastric pain or burning not associated with defecation AND another medical condition excluded after appropriate evaluation Subtype: postprandial fullness or early satiation → H2a1 postprandial distress syndrome epigastric pain or burning → H2a2 epigastric pain syndrome both may be present simultaneously
Bothersome
Rome IV defines this as severe enough to interfere with usual activities — in a child, that usually means school, meals or sleep.
Not associated with defecation
The boundary with irritable bowel syndrome. Pain relieved by opening the bowels, or accompanied by a change in stool form or frequency, belongs to IBS.
Four times a month
About once a week. The adult criteria require three days a week for three months, so the paediatric bar is roughly a third as demanding.
  • Two months and four episodes a month, against the adult three months and three days a week.
  • Rome IV adds 'not associated with defecation' to the epigastric pain criterion in children; the adult wording relies on the separate IBS criteria to do that work.
  • Supportive features of postprandial distress syndrome include upper abdominal bloating, postprandial nausea and excessive belching.
  • Epigastric pain syndrome pain is not generalised, not localised elsewhere in the abdomen or chest, and not relieved by defecation or flatus.

Interpreting the result

Give the diagnosis positively and without waiting for a normal endoscopy to license it. In the absence of alarm features, endoscopy is not required by the criteria and rarely changes management. Test for Helicobacter pylori only where locally indicated, and interpret a positive result cautiously: eradication in a child with dyspepsia and no ulcer disease frequently fails to relieve symptoms, and promising otherwise sets up a disappointment that undermines the subsequent management. Where postprandial distress predominates, start with meal size and pace, fat content and carbonated drinks, and consider a prokinetic if symptoms are severe. Where epigastric pain predominates, acid suppression is reasonable as a time-limited trial with a defined stop date rather than an indefinite prescription. In both, address school attendance and anxiety explicitly at the first consultation — these predict outcome more strongly than symptom severity does, and they are far easier to influence early. Where criteria are not met, look at the pattern: pain relieved by defecation or associated with a change in stool form is IBS, episodic severe pain with wellness in between is abdominal migraine, and nausea unrelated to meals is functional nausea. Alarm features — weight loss, dysphagia, gastrointestinal bleeding, persistent vomiting, nocturnal symptoms, unexplained fever or a family history of inflammatory bowel disease — take the child out of this pathway entirely.

ScoreBandWhat it meansAction
H2a1 — Postprandial distress syndromeMeal-related dyspepsiaPostprandial fullness or early satiationMeal size and pace, fat content, carbonated drinks; consider a prokinetic if severe
H2a2 — Epigastric pain syndromePain-predominant dyspepsiaEpigastric pain or burning not associated with defecationTime-limited acid suppression trial with a stop date; consider neuromodulation and psychological approaches
Both subtypesOverlapping PDS and EPSMeal-related and pain symptoms both presentCommon and expected; treat the dominant symptom first rather than forcing a choice
Criteria not metCriteria not metFrequency or duration unsatisfied, no qualifying symptom, or another condition explains itConsider IBS, abdominal migraine, functional nausea or functional abdominal pain NOS

What the Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia needs (5 inputs)

Bothersome symptoms occurring at least 4 times a month, for at least 2 months prior to diagnosis
Considerably lower than the adult bar of three days a week for three months. Rome IV lowered it because intermittent symptoms are still disruptive at school age, and because waiting three months in a child is not neutral.
Postprandial fullness
One of the two postprandial distress syndrome symptoms. Bothersome means severe enough to interfere with usual activities.
Early satiation
Rome IV describes this as preventing the child from finishing a regular meal — a definition a child can actually apply.
Epigastric pain or burning not associated with defecation
The epigastric pain syndrome symptom. The defecation qualifier is what separates it from irritable bowel syndrome, where pain relates to bowel actions.
After appropriate evaluation, the symptoms cannot be fully explained by another medical condition
What counts as appropriate is not specified. In the absence of alarm features this does not require endoscopy.

What it returns

Criteria met or not met
The frequency and duration gate, the exclusion clause, and at least one qualifying symptom.
Subtype
Postprandial distress syndrome, epigastric pain syndrome, or both — the two overlap frequently and Rome IV does not require choosing.

How it is calculated

Functional dyspepsia in children reflects altered gastroduodenal sensorimotor function and altered gut-brain signalling rather than any structural abnormality. The mechanisms that have been demonstrated are the same as in adults: impaired gastric accommodation to a meal, which maps onto early satiation and postprandial fullness; duodenal hypersensitivity, particularly to acid and lipid; low-grade duodenal inflammation with increased eosinophils in a subset; and central amplification of visceral signals. Which of these dominates differs between children, which is why no single treatment works for everyone and why the subtypes are worth recording. The reason Rome IV subtypes at all is that the two groups behave differently in clinic: meal-related symptoms respond to changing how and what the child eats, while pain-predominant symptoms behave more like other visceral pain disorders and respond to neuromodulation and psychological approaches. In children specifically, the balance tips further towards central and psychosocial contributions than it does in adults, which is why school and anxiety are not peripheral considerations here.

Facts & figures

Paediatric versus adult functional dyspepsia criteria
ElementChildren (H2a)Adults
Duration2 months3 months, onset ≥ 6 months earlier
Frequency≥ 4 times a monthPDS ≥ 3 days a week; EPS ≥ 1 day a week
Epigastric pain qualifierExplicitly 'not associated with defecation'Handled by the separate IBS criteria
EndoscopyNot required without alarm featuresRecommended over a threshold age in most guidelines
H. pyloriWeak association; test only where locally indicatedTest-and-treat is standard in many settings
SubtypesPDS and EPS, may overlapPDS and EPS, may overlap

The paediatric bar is roughly a third as demanding, and deliberately so — symptoms well below the adult threshold already interfere with school.

Evidence

Derivation — Rome Foundation, child/adolescent committee

2016

Consensus criteria from the Rome IV committee on childhood functional gastrointestinal disorders in the child and adolescent age band, published in Gastroenterology in 2016.

Consensus-derived. Rome IV introduced the PDS and EPS subtypes into the paediatric criteria for the first time, and set a frequency threshold roughly a third of the adult one.

Randomised trial — gut-directed hypnotherapy

2007

Randomised controlled trial of gut-directed hypnotherapy in children with functional abdominal pain or irritable bowel syndrome, reported by Vlieger and colleagues in 2007.

Substantially more effective than standard medical care, with benefit maintained at long-term follow-up — the strongest paediatric evidence for a psychological intervention in functional gastrointestinal disorders.

How it compares

Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia vs Functional dyspepsia in adults

Same subtypes, a third of the frequency bar, and an extra clause in the pain criterion to keep IBS out.

The adult criteria require three months of symptoms with onset at least six months earlier, and set separate frequency thresholds for the two subtypes — three days a week for postprandial distress, one day a week for epigastric pain. The paediatric criteria collapse this to four times a month over two months and add 'not associated with defecation' to the pain criterion. The subtypes and their supportive features are otherwise the same, and both sets allow the two to overlap. The practical divergence is in investigation: adult guidelines generally endorse endoscopy over a threshold age, while the paediatric criteria are explicitly built to support diagnosis without it.

Open the Functional dyspepsia in adults calculator →

Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia vs Paediatric irritable bowel syndrome

The boundary Rome IV wrote into the symptom itself — pain related to defecation is IBS, pain unrelated to it is dyspepsia.

Paediatric IBS requires abdominal pain at least four days a month associated with defecation, a change in stool frequency, or a change in stool form. Functional dyspepsia requires epigastric pain explicitly not associated with defecation. The two are therefore mutually exclusive on that axis by design, and a single question resolves most cases. The overlap in children is nonetheless real, and where both patterns are genuinely present the constipation clause in the IBS criteria — pain that resolves when constipation resolves is not IBS — is the next thing to test.

Open the Paediatric irritable bowel syndrome calculator →

Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia vs Abdominal migraine

Episodic and incapacitating with long well intervals, versus frequent and grumbling — the temporal shape separates them.

Abdominal migraine requires paroxysmal episodes lasting an hour or more, separated by weeks to months, incapacitating, stereotypical, and accompanied by at least two of anorexia, nausea, vomiting, headache, photophobia or pallor. Functional dyspepsia is a recurrent, lower-intensity pattern occurring at least four times a month without those long well intervals. A child described as having 'attacks' that stop normal activity and then resolve completely for weeks is more likely to have abdominal migraine, and the treatment — migraine prophylaxis — is quite different.

Open the Abdominal migraine calculator →Hyams JS, Di Lorenzo C, Saps M, Shulman RJ, Staiano A, van Tilburg M. Childhood Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders: Child/Adolescent. Gastroenterology. 2016;150(6):1456-1468.

Pearls & pitfalls

  • Ask whether the pain changes with opening the bowels. It is one question and it separates dyspepsia from IBS.
  • Endoscopy is not required by the criteria in the absence of alarm features, and its yield in that setting is low.
  • Be cautious with Helicobacter pylori. The association in paediatric dyspepsia is weak, and eradication often fails to relieve symptoms.
  • Four times a month, not three days a week — using the adult threshold in a child excludes patients who need help.
  • Two months, not three. Every paediatric duration rule is shorter.
  • Address school attendance at the first visit; it predicts outcome better than symptom severity.
  • Both subtypes coexist frequently and there is no need to choose between them.
  • If acid suppression is trialled for pain-predominant symptoms, set a stop date at the start.
  • Bothersome means interfering with usual activities — for a child, that is school, meals or sleep.
  • Alarm features — weight loss, dysphagia, bleeding, persistent vomiting, nocturnal symptoms, fever, family history of IBD — take the child out of this pathway.

Critical actions

  • Establish which symptoms are present and how often, using the four-times-a-month threshold rather than the adult one.
  • Ask explicitly whether the pain relates to defecation or to a change in stool form or frequency.
  • Ask about weight loss, dysphagia, bleeding, persistent vomiting and nocturnal symptoms before settling on a functional label.
  • Plot growth; weight loss or centile crossing changes the assessment entirely.
  • Record the subtype, since it directs the initial treatment.
  • Avoid endoscopy in the absence of alarm features.
  • Quantify school absence in days and start a graded return plan where relevant.
  • Give the diagnosis by name and explain the mechanism rather than reporting normal tests.
  • Consider gut-directed hypnotherapy or cognitive behavioural therapy, which have good paediatric evidence.

Why this score exists

Adding 'not associated with defecation' to the epigastric pain criterion is a small edit that reveals how differently the paediatric committee had to think. The adult criteria do not need that clause: adults with dyspepsia and adults with IBS are largely different clinic populations, and the separate IBS criteria sort out the overlap. In children the overlap is far larger — the same child frequently has upper abdominal pain, altered stools and a constipation history all at once, and asking a nine-year-old to localise pain reliably is optimistic. So the committee built the discriminator directly into the symptom itself, turning a taxonomic boundary into a single question anyone can ask: does it get better when you go to the toilet? That is a more robust instrument in a paediatric consultation than any amount of cross-referencing between criteria sets, and it is the kind of change that only comes from writing criteria for the population that will actually be assessed with them.

About the creator

  • Jeffrey S. Hyams

    First author, Rome IV child/adolescent functional gastrointestinal disorders committee

    Chaired the committee that produced the child and adolescent criteria.

  • Miguel Saps

    Co-author; paediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders

    Contributed much of the epidemiological work underpinning the paediatric abdominal pain criteria.

  • Robert J. Shulman

    Co-author; paediatric gastroenterology and nutrition

    Co-authored the child and adolescent chapter of Rome IV.

Limitations

  • Consensus criteria with no validation cohort; the four-times-a-month threshold is a judgement rather than a measured boundary.
  • 'Bothersome' relies on a child's report and on caregiver interpretation of it, neither of which is standardised.
  • Localising epigastric pain is unreliable in younger children, which weakens the subtype distinction at the lower end of the age range.
  • 'Appropriate evaluation' is undefined, so practice varies widely on how much investigation precedes the diagnosis.
  • The criteria do not address Helicobacter pylori, despite it being the commonest reason paediatric dyspepsia gets investigated.
  • No severity grading, and severity rather than frequency is what drives school absence.
  • Subtypes overlap frequently, which limits how much treatment guidance the classification can carry.
  • Nothing in the criteria addresses the school and family context, which predicts outcome more strongly than the symptoms do.

If you are the patient

Functional dyspepsia means recurring discomfort in the upper tummy — feeling uncomfortably full after eating, filling up much sooner than expected, or pain or burning just below the breastbone — without any damage or disease being found. It is common in children and teenagers and it is a real condition, not a matter of imagination. What is happening is that the stomach and the first part of the gut have become oversensitive, and the nerve signals between them and the brain are being amplified. The stomach may also not relax as easily as it should when food arrives, which is why some children feel full after only a few mouthfuls. Doctors sort it into two types. If the main problem is feeling full or filling up quickly, changes to how meals are eaten usually help most — smaller portions more often, eating slowly, less fatty food and fewer fizzy drinks. If the main problem is pain or burning, a short trial of a stomach acid medicine may be worth it, though it should have a planned end date rather than continuing indefinitely. Many children have both types, which is normal and does not need untangling. A camera test is usually not needed. In children without warning signs it very rarely finds anything, and the diagnosis can be made confidently without it. Two things make more difference than most treatments: keeping up with school, even on bad days, and dealing with any worry or stress that is feeding into it. Getting back to normal activities usually happens before the symptoms fully settle, and that is the right way round.

Frequently asked questions

What are the Rome IV criteria for functional dyspepsia in children?#

One or more bothersome symptoms — postprandial fullness, early satiation, or epigastric pain or burning not associated with defecation — at least four times a month for at least two months, with other medical conditions excluded after appropriate evaluation.

How do the paediatric criteria differ from the adult ones?#

Two ways. The frequency bar is much lower — four times a month over two months, against three days a week over three months with onset at least six months earlier. And epigastric pain is explicitly qualified as not associated with defecation, which builds the boundary with irritable bowel syndrome into the symptom itself rather than leaving it to a separate criteria set.

Does a child with dyspepsia need an endoscopy?#

Not in the absence of alarm features. The criteria are designed to support a positive diagnosis without endoscopy, and its diagnostic yield in children without alarm features is low. Weight loss, dysphagia, gastrointestinal bleeding, persistent vomiting, nocturnal symptoms, unexplained fever or a family history of inflammatory bowel disease change that.

Should a child be tested for Helicobacter pylori?#

Only where locally indicated, and with caution about interpreting a positive result. The association between H. pylori and dyspepsia is much weaker in children than in adults, and eradication in a child with dyspepsia and no ulcer disease frequently fails to relieve symptoms — promising otherwise creates a disappointment that makes the subsequent management harder.

What is the difference between PDS and EPS?#

Postprandial distress syndrome is meal-related — postprandial fullness or early satiation preventing the child from finishing a regular meal, often with upper abdominal bloating, postprandial nausea or excessive belching. Epigastric pain syndrome is pain or burning localised to the epigastrium, not generalised, not relieved by defecation or flatus. They overlap frequently and Rome IV does not require choosing between them.

Why did Rome IV set such a low frequency threshold?#

Because a child does not need adult-level symptom frequency to be significantly affected. Symptoms occurring about once a week already disrupt meals, sleep and school attendance, and requiring three days a week for three months before making the diagnosis would exclude a large group of children who need help — while the waiting itself allows school absence to accumulate.

What treatment works best?#

It depends on the subtype and on what else is going on. Meal-related symptoms respond to changes in meal size, pace and fat content, with a prokinetic considered if severe. Pain-predominant symptoms may warrant a time-limited acid suppression trial and respond to neuromodulation and psychological approaches. Gut-directed hypnotherapy has the strongest paediatric trial evidence in this family of disorders.

Why does school attendance matter?#

Because it predicts outcome more strongly than symptom severity does, and because absence compounds — a child out of school for weeks faces academic and social re-entry problems on top of the original symptom. Addressing it at the first consultation, with a graded plan, is more valuable than most of the medical options.

Related calculators

  • Functional Dyspepsia — Rome IV — with PDS and EPS subtyping
  • Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome — Rome IV — plus the constipation clause clinicians miss
  • Abdominal Migraine — Rome IV — stereotypical incapacitating episodes weeks apart
  • Functional Nausea & Vomiting (Children) — Rome IV — two separate disorders that can be met together
  • Functional Abdominal Pain — NOS — Rome IV — the residual category, reached after the other three

References

Original / primary reference

  1. Hyams JS, Di Lorenzo C, Saps M, Shulman RJ, Staiano A, van Tilburg M. Childhood Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders: Child/Adolescent. Gastroenterology. 2016;150(6):1456-1468 (Rome IV).

Treatment evidence

  1. Vlieger AM, Menko-Frankenhuis C, Wolfkamp SCS, Tromp E, Benninga MA. Hypnotherapy for Children With Functional Abdominal Pain or Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Gastroenterology. 2007;133(5):1430-1436.

Last updated August 1, 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.