Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20485283›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of gastroenterology2010

Meta-analyses of the effect of symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux on the risk of Barrett's esophagus.

Justin B Taylor, Joel H Rubenstein

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 147 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prevalence of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma With and Without Gastroesophageal Reflux: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Endoscopic Screening of Barrett's Esophagus.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2026
    Review
  7. New Approaches to Screening for Barrett Esophagus.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    Article
  8. Improving esophageal cancer screening across the globe: Translating knowledge into action.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. High rate of missed Barrett's esophagus when screening with forceps biopsies.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. LAPAROSCOPIC ANTIREFLUX SURGERY: ARE OLD QUESTIONS ANSWERED? SHOULD IT BE USED CONJOINED WITH ENDOSCOPIC THERAPY FOR BARRETT'S ESOPHAGUS?Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Justin B TaylorMichigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Joel H Rubenstein
Ann Arbor VA Medical Center · US

Funding

The Epidemiology of Adipokines in Barrett's EsophagusK23DK079291 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI RUBENSTEIN, JOEL H · 2007 to 2011
$760k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK079291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEsophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is a devastating disease that has risen in incidence over the past several decades. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an associated premalignant lesion. Current preventative efforts rely on endoscopic screening of individuals with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and surveillance endoscopy for those with BE. However, some recent studies have found a high prevalence of BE in patients without GERD, and others have found little or no association with GERD. We hypothesized that studies of higher-quality design show weaker associations of GERD with BE, and that GERD is only weakly associated with short-segment Barrett's esophagus (SSBE).

methodsWe performed a systematic literature search in multiple online electronic databases regardless of language. Eligible studies required visualization of columnar mucosa and histological confirmation of intestinal metaplasia, and GERD symptoms ascertained by questionnaire or interview. The highest-quality sampling design was defined a priori by both cases and controls identified among unselected research volunteers ("research design") rather than by patients selected for endoscopy for clinical indications ("clinical design"), which introduces selection and ascertainment bias. A priori, heterogeneity was defined by Cochrane's Q P<0.20 and the inconsistency index (I(2); 25% low, 50% moderate, and 75% high). Heterogeneity of results can reflect significant differences in study design or effect modification by strata of outcomes.

resultsSystematic review identified 13,392 citations. Evaluation identified 108 potentially relevant journal articles, of which 26 met eligibility. Of these, 14 studies identified cases of BE and controls based on clinical indication ("clinical design"), and 6 used the "research design." The remaining six studies identified cases of BE from patients undergoing endoscopy for clinical indication and controls among patients without known BE ("cases clinical/controls research"). The summary odds ratio (OR) for the association of GERD with BE from all studies was 2.90 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.86-4.54), but the results were very heterogeneous (P=0.0001; I(2)=89%). When stratified by BE length and sampling design, the studies with clinical design showed substantial, but heterogeneous, associations with SSBE (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.21-4.70; P=0.02; I(2)=62%), and stronger and homogeneous association with long-segment BE (LSBE; fixed effects OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.69-5.19; P=0.25; I(2)=25%). In the research study design, stratifying by length of BE resolved the heterogeneity and showed a strong association between GERD and LSBE (fixed effects OR, 4.92; 95% CI, 2.01-12.0; P=0.30; I(2)=19%) and no association with SSBE (fixed effects OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.763-1.73; P=0.84; I(2)=0%). Funnel plots showed potential evidence for bias against dissemination of small negative studies.

conclusionsIn the highest-quality studies, GERD symptoms are not associated with SSBE, but increased the odds of LSBE by fivefold. GERD symptoms can serve as a reliable predictor of LSBE, but not SSBE. If SSBE is considered worthy of identification, then current screening practices do not select patients at risk for endoscopy, and alternative methods of selection for screening need to be developed.

Indexed as

Barrett EsophagusEsophagoscopyGastroesophageal RefluxHumansPrecancerous ConditionsRisk

Identifiers

PMID20485283
PMCPMC2916949
OpenAlexW2080309509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.