ArticleScientific reports2026
Distinct psychophysiological biomarkers and risk stratification models for irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and diarrhea (IBS-D).
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a prevalent disorder of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) with a complex, multifactorial pathogenesis. Emerging evidence underscores the significant role of psychosocial factors; however, comprehensive models integrating multidimensional psychophysiological biomarkers to predict IBS subtypes often lack validation in this highly heterogeneous population. To evaluate the value of a psychophysiological multimodal approach in identifying predictive signatures for irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and diarrhea (IBS-D). In this cross-sectional study, 80 IBS-C patients, 80 IBS-D patients, and 80 healthy controls were included. Assessments included eye-tracking (cognitive-emotional interaction), heart rate variability (autonomic function), psychological scales (SCL-90, SCSQ, EPQ), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Multivariable logistic regression and ROC analyses were utilized to identify predictors and evaluate internal model performance. Shared predictive factors for both subtypes included the SCL-90 hostility factor, EPQ neuroticism, negative coping, and global PSQI score (all P < 0.05). IBS-C was specifically associated with hostility and neuroticism, whereas IBS-D was distinctively predicted by prolonged prosaccade latency, reduced HRV medium-frequency power, and a lack of positive coping. The models demonstrated strong internal discrimination, with AUCs up to 0.983 for IBS-C and 0.967 for IBS-D. Psychosocial factors and sleep disturbances are robust shared predictive risk factors for IBS-C and IBS-D. Furthermore, multimodal profiling reveals subtype-specific predictive signatures: prominent emotional reactivity in IBS-C, and altered sensory-autonomic integration in IBS-D. These findings underscore the associative heterogeneity of IBS and highlight the potential utility of psychophysiologically targeted interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.