ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2016
Chicago Classification of Esophageal Motility Disorders: Applications and Limits in Adults and Pediatric Patients with Esophageal Symptoms.
Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Normal Values in Esophageal High-Resolution Manometry Performed Using 36-Channel Water-Perfused Catheter or Solid-State Catheter.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Oesophageal eosinophilia and oesophageal diseases in children: are the limits clear?BMJ paediatrics open · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Chicago classification (CC) is most valued for its systematic approach to esophageal disorders and great impact in unifying practice for esophageal manometric studies. In view of the ever-growing wealth of knowledge and experience gained by the expanding use of high-resolution manometry (HRM) in various clinical scenarios, the CC is regularly updated. Its clinical impact and ability to predict clinical outcome, both in adults and pediatrics, will be further promoted by recognizing its current limitations, incorporating new metrics in its diagnostic algorithms and adjusting the HRM protocols based on the clinical question posed. Herein, we discuss the current limitations of the CC and highlight some areas of improvement for the future.
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.