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 Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Functional GI

Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Rome IV — plus the constipation clause clinicians miss

Two months. The adult criteria require six months of symptoms before diagnosis, which is not acceptable in a child missing school.

One or more of the three associations is enough — the same structure as the adult criteria, at a lower frequency threshold.

Rome IV states this explicitly: if treating the constipation abolishes the pain, the diagnosis is functional constipation and not IBS. It is the commonest paediatric misclassification.

Coeliac disease and inflammatory bowel disease are the two that most often masquerade as paediatric IBS.

Two months and four days a month, against the adult six months and one day a week. The second criterion is the one clinicians miss — a child whose pain resolves when the constipation is treated has functional constipation, not IBS.

When to use
Use it in a child or adolescent with recurrent abdominal pain and altered bowel habit, once coeliac disease and inflammatory bowel disease have been considered. The most useful moment is early, before a long work-up has accumulated — the criteria are built to support a positive diagnosis rather than a residual one. The constipation clause is best applied prospectively: treat any constipation properly first, then see whether the pain is still there. That single step is both a treatment and a diagnostic test, and it is where the assessment most often goes wrong.
Why use it
Because the alternative is a diagnosis of exclusion arrived at slowly, and slowness is costly in children. Repeated investigation entrenches illness behaviour, school absence compounds, and families become progressively less willing to accept a functional explanation the longer it takes to arrive at one. The criteria also fix a specific and common error: a large group of children have constipation with associated pain, are labelled with IBS, and are then managed as if the constipation were incidental. Rome IV's constipation clause exists precisely to catch that group, because clearing the constipation resolves them entirely and mislabelling them commits a child to a chronic diagnosis they do not have.
Formula, evidence and interpretation

About the Rome IV Criteria for Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Abdominal pain at least four days per month over at least two months, associated with one or more of: relation to defecation, a change in stool frequency, or a change in stool form. Plus two further requirements. In a child with pain and constipation, the pain must not resolve when the constipation resolves — Rome IV states this explicitly, and a child whose pain disappears once the constipation is treated has functional constipation, not IBS. And after appropriate evaluation the symptoms cannot be fully explained by another condition. The thresholds are far lower than the adult criteria's six months and one day a week, because a child does not need adult-level symptom frequency to be significantly affected.

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 IBS = ≥ 2 months AND abdominal pain ≥ 4 days/month associated with ≥ 1 of: related to defecation | change in stool frequency | change in stool form AND (if constipation present) pain does not resolve when constipation resolves AND another medical condition excluded after appropriate evaluation
Four days per month
About once a week. The adult criteria require at least one day per week over three months with onset six months earlier, so the paediatric bar is markedly lower in both frequency and duration.
The constipation clause
Unique to the paediatric criteria. It cannot be assessed from the history alone — it requires treating the constipation and then reassessing the pain.
Change in stool form
Best captured with a Bristol scale and a stool diary rather than by asking a child to characterise their stools from memory.
  • Two months and four days a month, against the adult six months and one day a week.
  • Rome IV subtypes paediatric IBS by predominant stool form following the adult convention, though the subtypes carry less treatment weight in children.
  • The constipation clause has no adult equivalent, because functional constipation and IBS-C are separated differently in adults.
  • Alarm features are not part of the criteria but take a child out of the pathway entirely.

Interpreting the result

Treat the constipation first, to completion, in any child who has it. This is the single highest-value action: it is therapeutic in its own right, it tests the Rome IV constipation clause, and it prevents a child with treatable constipation being labelled with a chronic disorder. Once that is done and pain persists, give the diagnosis by name and explain the mechanism — children and families do markedly better with a stated diagnosis than with a list of normal results, and an unnamed symptom invites further testing that entrenches the problem. Limit investigation in the absence of alarm features; coeliac serology and a faecal calprotectin are reasonable, repeated endoscopy is not. Address school attendance in the first consultation and aim at function rather than symptom elimination, since function generally recovers first. For treatment, gut-directed hypnotherapy has the strongest paediatric evidence, with benefit sustained at long-term follow-up and home-based self-exercises shown non-inferior to therapist-delivered sessions — which matters where therapist time is scarce. Where criteria are not met, the failing criterion points somewhere useful: pain resolving with constipation is functional constipation, pain unrelated to defecation with epigastric localisation is functional dyspepsia, and episodic incapacitating pain with long well intervals is abdominal migraine.

ScoreBandWhat it meansAction
Criteria metPaediatric irritable bowel syndromePain at least four days a month related to defecation or stool change, persisting after constipation is treatedName the diagnosis; limit further investigation; prioritise school attendance; consider gut-directed hypnotherapy or CBT
Criteria not met — pain resolves with constipationFunctional constipation, not IBSThe pain disappears once the constipation is clearedManage as functional constipation with proper disimpaction and prolonged maintenance
Criteria not met — frequency or duration unsatisfiedCriteria not metFewer than four days a month, or under two monthsReassess after a symptom diary; consider functional abdominal pain NOS if the pattern persists
Alarm features presentOutside the pathwayWeight loss, blood in stool, nocturnal symptoms, perianal disease, fever or family history of IBDInvestigate rather than applying a functional label

What the Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome needs (4 inputs)

Criteria fulfilled for at least 2 months prior to diagnosis
Two months, against six months in the adult criteria. The paediatric committee shortened it on the basis that requiring half a year of symptoms in a child missing school is not defensible.
Abdominal pain at least 4 days per month, associated with defecation, a change in stool frequency, or a change in stool form
One or more of the three associations is sufficient — the same structure as the adult criteria, at a lower frequency threshold of four days a month rather than one day a week.
In a child with pain and constipation, the pain does not resolve when the constipation resolves
The criterion clinicians most often skip. Rome IV states it explicitly: children whose pain resolves with the constipation have functional constipation, not IBS. Testing it requires treating the constipation properly rather than assuming.
After appropriate evaluation, the symptoms cannot be fully explained by another medical condition
Coeliac disease and inflammatory bowel disease are the two that most often present this way and are worth considering explicitly.

What it returns

Criteria met or not met
All four criteria are required.
Which criterion is outstanding
Reported when criteria are not met — most commonly the constipation clause, which redirects to functional constipation.

How it is calculated

Paediatric IBS reflects disordered gut-brain interaction: visceral hypersensitivity, altered motility, changes in the intestinal microbiota, low-grade immune activation in some children, and central amplification of visceral signals. What distinguishes the paediatric picture is how much of the variance sits at the central and psychosocial end. Post-infectious onset is well described, as is onset after a period of significant stress, and anxiety is both a risk factor for developing symptoms and a strong predictor of how disabling they become. That is not a statement that the pain is psychological — the hypersensitivity is measurable — but it does explain why interventions aimed at the gut alone underperform, and why the psychological therapies have the best trial data in this population. It also explains the constipation clause. A constipated child has a genuine mechanical driver of pain sitting on top of whatever sensitisation exists, and until that driver is removed there is no way to know whether the sensitisation is doing anything at all.

Facts & figures

Paediatric versus adult IBS criteria
ElementChildren (H2b)Adults
Duration2 months3 months, onset ≥ 6 months earlier
Pain frequency≥ 4 days a month≥ 1 day a week
Associations required≥ 1 of 3 (defecation, frequency, form)≥ 2 of 3
Constipation clauseExplicit — pain must persist after constipation resolvesNo equivalent
Exclusion clauseStated as a criterionHandled outside the criteria
SubtypingBy predominant stool formBy predominant stool form

The paediatric criteria require only one of the three associations where the adult criteria require two — a deliberate loosening alongside the shorter duration.

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. The distinctive addition was the explicit constipation clause, written to stop children with treatable constipation being labelled with a lifelong functional diagnosis.

Randomised trial — gut-directed hypnotherapy

2007

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

Hypnotherapy was substantially more effective than standard care, with benefit sustained at long-term follow-up — the strongest paediatric evidence for any intervention in this group.

Randomised trial — home-based hypnotherapy

2017

Randomised comparison of home-based hypnotherapy self-exercises against individual therapist-delivered hypnotherapy in paediatric IBS and functional abdominal pain, reported by Rutten and colleagues in 2017.

Home-based self-exercises were non-inferior on the primary outcome, materially improving access where therapist availability is the limiting factor.

How it compares

Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome vs Rome IV IBS in adults

Shorter duration, lower frequency, one association instead of two, and a constipation clause with no adult equivalent.

The adult criteria require recurrent abdominal pain at least one day per week over three months with onset at least six months earlier, associated with two or more of the three features. The paediatric criteria require four days a month over two months with one or more association, and add the requirement that pain persist after any constipation resolves. Every one of those changes loosens the definition except the last, which tightens it in the one place where children are most often misclassified.

Open the Rome IV IBS in adults calculator →

Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome vs Paediatric functional constipation

The distinction Rome IV built a prospective test for — treat the constipation and see whether the pain remains.

Paediatric functional constipation requires two or more of its listed items over one month, and its own criteria state that the diagnosis applies where criteria for IBS are insufficient. The two are separated by what happens after treatment: a child whose pain disappears once the constipation clears has functional constipation, and one whose pain persists has IBS. Because this cannot be judged cross-sectionally, the assessment properly takes two appointments rather than one — which is the main reason the clause gets skipped.

Open the Paediatric functional constipation calculator →

Paediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome vs Functional abdominal pain — not otherwise specified

The residual category that exists for children whose pain fits none of the three defined disorders, IBS included.

Functional abdominal pain NOS requires explicitly that criteria for IBS, functional dyspepsia and abdominal migraine are all insufficient. It is therefore not an alternative to IBS but a category reached after IBS has been considered and found not to fit — most often because the pain has no relation to defecation or to stool form. Management is broadly the same, which is worth saying to families who assume the vaguer label means a worse outlook.

Open the Functional abdominal pain — not otherwise specified 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

  • Treat the constipation to completion first. It is both the treatment and the diagnostic test, and it is the step most often skipped.
  • Four days a month over two months — using the adult thresholds in a child excludes patients who need help.
  • The paediatric criteria need only one of the three symptom associations; the adult criteria need two.
  • Give the diagnosis by name. 'The tests were normal' invites more tests; a named condition does not.
  • Address school attendance at the first consultation, before absence has become the dominant problem.
  • Use a Bristol scale and a stool diary rather than asking a child to characterise stools from memory.
  • Coeliac serology and faecal calprotectin are reasonable; repeated endoscopy in the absence of alarm features is not.
  • Gut-directed hypnotherapy has the best paediatric evidence, and home-based self-exercises were non-inferior to therapist sessions.
  • Post-infectious onset and onset after a period of stress are both well described — asking what was happening when it started is worthwhile.
  • Weight loss, blood in stool, nocturnal symptoms, perianal disease, unexplained fever or a family history of IBD take the child out of this pathway.

Critical actions

  • Take a full stool history including frequency, form, straining and any withholding behaviour.
  • Treat any constipation properly — disimpaction where needed, then adequate maintenance — before concluding the assessment.
  • Reassess the pain after the constipation has cleared, which is what the Rome IV clause requires.
  • Check for blood in the stool, nocturnal waking, perianal disease and delayed puberty before settling on a functional label.
  • Plot growth; centile crossing changes the assessment.
  • Send coeliac serology and consider faecal calprotectin where inflammatory bowel disease is plausible.
  • Quantify school absence in days and start a graded return plan.
  • Give the diagnosis explicitly and explain the mechanism to the child as well as the caregiver.
  • Refer for gut-directed hypnotherapy or cognitive behavioural therapy where available.

Why this score exists

The constipation clause is the most consequential sentence in the paediatric abdominal pain chapter, and it is written as a subordinate remark. Rome IV could have relied, as the adult criteria do, on the separate functional constipation definition to sort these children out. It did not, because in children the two present as one thing: a child with hard infrequent stools and abdominal pain looks exactly like a child with IBS-C, and the distinction is invisible in a single consultation. So the committee made the test prospective rather than cross-sectional — treat the constipation, then look again. That is unusual in diagnostic criteria, which normally describe a state rather than prescribe an intervention, and it means the criteria cannot be completed on the day the child is seen. It is worth the inconvenience. The children it separates out are the ones who get completely better, and labelling them with a chronic disorder because nobody cleared the constipation first is an avoidable and surprisingly common harm.

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, including H2b.

  • Miguel Saps

    Co-author; paediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders

    Contributed much of the epidemiology underpinning the paediatric abdominal pain criteria.

  • Arine M. Vlieger

    Lead author of the randomised trials of gut-directed hypnotherapy in paediatric IBS

    Produced the trial evidence that underpins the recommended psychological treatment in this group.

Limitations

  • Consensus criteria with no validation cohort; the four-days-a-month threshold is a judgement rather than a measured boundary.
  • The constipation clause cannot be assessed at a single visit, so the criteria are frequently applied without it.
  • Children characterise stool form unreliably without a Bristol chart and a diary, which are not always used.
  • 'Appropriate evaluation' is undefined, so the amount of investigation preceding the diagnosis varies widely.
  • Requiring only one of three associations makes the definition broad, and its specificity against organic disease has not been measured.
  • Subtyping by predominant stool form carries less treatment implication in children than in adults.
  • No severity grading, though severity rather than frequency drives school absence and disability.
  • Nothing in the criteria addresses anxiety or the school context, both of which predict outcome more strongly than the symptoms.

If you are the patient

Irritable bowel syndrome in children means recurring tummy pain that is linked to going to the toilet — it may ease after opening the bowels, or come with stools becoming looser, harder, more frequent or less frequent than usual. It is common, it is real, and nothing is damaged. What is happening is that the nerves in the gut have become more sensitive than usual, and the signals between the gut and the brain are being turned up, so ordinary events like food moving through are felt as pain. One thing worth knowing before anything else: if your child is also constipated, doctors will want to treat that thoroughly first. That is not a delaying tactic. Constipation on its own causes tummy pain, and in a good number of children the pain disappears completely once the constipation is properly cleared — in which case this was never IBS at all, and the outlook is much simpler. Only if the pain is still there afterwards does the IBS diagnosis apply. Beyond that, the most useful thing is keeping up with school. It is very tempting to stay home on painful days, and completely understandable, but the longer the gap the harder going back becomes, and returning eventually becomes a bigger obstacle than the pain. Doctors usually aim for a gradual planned return rather than waiting for the pain to go, because in practice getting on with things comes back first. For treatment, gut-directed hypnotherapy has the best evidence in children — it sounds unusual but it works well, the benefit lasts for years, and much of it can now be done at home with recordings rather than requiring weekly appointments.

Frequently asked questions

What are the Rome IV criteria for IBS in children?#

Abdominal pain at least four days per month over at least two months, associated with one or more of: relation to defecation, a change in stool frequency, or a change in stool form. Plus, in a child with constipation, the pain must not resolve when the constipation resolves; and other medical conditions must be excluded after appropriate evaluation.

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

Two months rather than six, four days a month rather than one day a week, and only one of the three symptom associations rather than two. Those changes all loosen the definition. The one addition that tightens it is the constipation clause, which has no adult equivalent.

What is the constipation clause and why does it matter?#

Rome IV states that in a child with pain and constipation, the pain must not resolve when the constipation resolves — children whose pain does resolve have functional constipation, not IBS. It matters because a constipated child with pain looks exactly like a child with IBS-C in a single consultation, and mislabelling commits a child who would get completely better to a chronic diagnosis.

How do you test the constipation clause?#

Prospectively. Treat the constipation properly — disimpaction if there is a faecal mass, then adequate maintenance for long enough — and then reassess the pain. It cannot be judged from the history, which means the assessment properly takes two appointments. That is the main reason the clause gets skipped.

What investigations does a child with suspected IBS need?#

Few, in the absence of alarm features. Coeliac serology is reasonable, as is faecal calprotectin where inflammatory bowel disease is plausible. Repeated endoscopy is not, and repeated investigation is actively counterproductive because it entrenches illness behaviour and delays the diagnosis that would allow management to start.

What treatment has the best evidence in children?#

Gut-directed hypnotherapy. A randomised trial found it substantially more effective than standard medical care with benefit sustained at long-term follow-up, and a later trial found home-based self-exercises non-inferior to therapist-delivered sessions — which makes it accessible where therapist time is limited. Cognitive behavioural therapy is a reasonable alternative where hypnotherapy is unavailable.

Why is school attendance emphasised so much?#

Because it predicts outcome more strongly than symptom severity, and because absence compounds. A child out of school for weeks acquires academic and social re-entry problems on top of the pain, and those become harder to solve than the original symptom. The goal is restored function rather than symptom elimination, since function usually recovers first.

What alarm features rule this out?#

Weight loss or centile crossing, blood in the stool, nocturnal symptoms that wake the child, perianal disease, unexplained fever, arthritis, delayed puberty, and a family history of inflammatory bowel disease or coeliac disease. Any of these means investigating rather than applying a functional label.

Related calculators

  • Rome IV Criteria for IBS — Irritable bowel syndrome diagnosis and subtype
  • Paediatric Functional Constipation — Rome IV — two of six over one month, with overflow soiling as a criterion
  • Functional Abdominal Pain — NOS — Rome IV — the residual category, reached after the other three
  • Paediatric Functional Dyspepsia — Rome IV — four times a month, with PDS and EPS subtyping
  • Abdominal Migraine — Rome IV — stereotypical incapacitating episodes weeks apart

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.
  2. Rutten JMTM, Vlieger AM, Frankenhuis C, George EK, Groeneweg M, Norbruis OF, et al. Home-Based Hypnotherapy Self-exercises vs Individual Hypnotherapy With a Therapist for Treatment of Pediatric Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Functional Abdominal Pain, or Functional Abdominal Pain Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(5):470-477.

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.