ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2014
From ischochymia to gastroparesis: proposed mechanisms and preferred management of dyspepsia over the centuries.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Harmful Treatment to Secondary Gain: Adverse Event Reporting in Dyspepsia and Gastroparesis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2017Article
- Cerebral mechanism of puncturing at He-Mu point combination for functional dyspepsia: study protocol for a randomized controlled parallel trial.Neural regeneration research · 2017Article
- Changes in patients' symptoms and gastric emptying after Helicobacter pylori treatment.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Observational
- Disorders of gastrointestinal hypomotility.F1000Research · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dyspeptic symptoms are common with most patients suffering functional disorders that remain a therapeutic challenge for medical practitioners. Within the last three decades, gastric infection, altered motility, and hypersensitivity have gained and lost traction in explaining the development of functional dyspepsia. Considering these shifts, the aim of this review was to analyze changing understanding of and approaches to dyspepsia over a longer time period. Monographs, textbooks, and articles published during the last three centuries show that our understanding of normal gastric function has improved dramatically. With increased insight came new ideas about disease mechanisms, diagnostic options, and treatments. Despite shifts over time, the importance of functional abnormalities was recognized early on and explained in the context of societal influences and stressors, anxieties, and biological influences, thus resembling the contemporary biopsychosocial model of illness. Symptoms were often attributed to changes in secretion, motility, and sensation or perception with technological innovation often influencing proposed mechanisms and treatments. Many of the principles or even agents applied more than a century ago are still part of today's approach. This includes acid suppression, antiemetics, analgesics, and even non-pharmacologic therapies, such as gastric decompression or electrical stimulation of the stomach. This historical information does not only help us understand how we arrived at our current state of knowledge and standards of care, it also demonstrates that enthusiastic adoption of various competing explanatory models and the resulting treatments often did not survive the test of time. In view of the benign prognosis of dyspepsia, the data may function as a call for caution to avoid the potential harm of overly aggressive approaches or treatments with a high likelihood of adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24715546What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.