ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology research
Effect of Body Mass Index on the sensitivity of Magnetogastrogram and Electrogastrogram.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gastric AlimetryJournal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Association of Gastric Myoelectrical Activity With Ghrelin, Gastrin, and Irisin in Adults With Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- Article
- Electrogastrography for psychophysiological research: Practical considerations, analysis pipeline, and normative data in a large sample.Psychophysiology · 2020Review
- Predicting factors of transmural thermal injury after cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2019Article
- Effects of body mass index on gastric slow wave: a magnetogastrographic study.Physiological measurement · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimGastric disorders affect the gastric slow wave. The cutaneous electrogastrogram (EGG) evaluates the electrical potential of the slow wave but is limited by the volume conduction properties of the abdominal wall. The magnetogastrogram (MGG) evaluates the gastric magnetic field activity and is not affected as much by the volume conductor properties of the abdominal wall. We hypothesized that MGG would not be as sensitive to body mass index as EGG.
methodsWe simultaneously recorded gastric slow wave signals with mucosal electrodes, a Superconducting Quantum Interference Device magnetometer (SQUID) and cutaneous electrodes before and after a test meal. Data were recorded from representative pools of human volunteers. The sensitivity of EGG and MGG was compared to the body mass index and waist circumference of volunteers.
resultsThe study population had good linear regression of their Waist circumference (Wc) and Body Mass Index (BMI) (regression coefficient,
conclusionsCompared to electrogastrogram, the sensitivity of the magnetogastrogram is less affected by changes in body mass index and waist circumference. The use of Second Order Blind Identification (SOBI) increased the sensitivity of EGG and MGG recordings and was not affected by BMI or waist circumference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.