Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28551709›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2017

The Validity of a New Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptoms Scale (SAGIS) for Evaluating Symptoms in the Clinical Setting.

N A Koloski, M Jones, J Hammer, M von Wulffen, A Shah, H Hoelz, M Kutyla, D Burger, N Martin, S R Gurusamy and 2 more

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT05553717 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Study Evaluating the Gastroprotective Effect of Carvedilol in Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease on Aspirin Therapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorTanta UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled66ConditionsIHD, Gastro-Intestinal Disorder, Aspirin Induced Esophageal UlcerArmsCarvedilol
NCT06564246 phase4recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Study Evaluating The Role of Vonoprazan Versus Pantoprazole in Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

TypeinterventionalSponsorTanta UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled44ConditionsGastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)ArmsVonoprazan 20 mg versus Pantoprazole 40 mg
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Laxative use and chronic diarrhoea in older adults living in residential care.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2026
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. AGut microbiome (Cambridge, England) · 2026
    Article
  13. Dietetic-Led Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for ARFID: A Novel Approach to Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder With Case Studies.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

N A KoloskiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8647-5933
M JonesDepartment of Psychology, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia.
J HammerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
M von WulffenDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
A ShahDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
H HoelzDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
M KutylaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
D BurgerDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
N MartinDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
S R GurusamyDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia.
N J TalleyFaculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia.
G HoltmannDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital and Translational Research Institute (TRI), Ipswich Rd, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. G.holtmann@uq.edu.au.
Translational Research Institute · AUMacquarie University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical assessments of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms can be time-consuming, and the symptoms captured during the consultation may be influenced by a variety of patient and non-patient factors. To facilitate standardized symptom assessment in the routine clinical setting, we developed the Structured Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptom (SAGIS) instrument to precisely characterize symptoms in a routine clinical setting.

aimsWe aimed to validate SAGIS including its reliability, construct and discriminant validity, and utility in the clinical setting.

methodsDevelopment of the SAGIS consisted of initial interviews with patients referred for the diagnostic work-up of digestive symptoms and relevant complaints identified. The final instrument consisted of 22 items as well as questions on extra intestinal symptoms and was given to 1120 consecutive patients attending a gastroenterology clinic randomly split into derivation (n = 596) and validation datasets (n = 551). Discriminant validity along with test-retest reliability was assessed. The time taken to perform a clinical assessment with and without the SAGIS was recorded along with doctor satisfaction with this tool.

resultsExploratory factor analysis conducted on the derivation sample suggested five symptom constructs labeled as abdominal pain/discomfort (seven items), gastroesophageal reflux disease/regurgitation symptoms (four items), nausea/vomiting (three items), diarrhea/incontinence (five items), and difficult defecation and constipation (2 items). Confirmatory factor analysis conducted on the validation sample supported the initially developed five-factor measurement model ([Formula: see text], p < 0.0001, χ

conclusionsThe SAGIS instrument has excellent psychometric properties and supports the clinical assessment of and symptom-based categorization of patients with a wide spectrum of gastrointestinal symptoms.

Indexed as

Factor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesSymptom AssessmentGastrointestinal symptomsIrritable bowel syndromeQuality of lifeQuestionnaire developmentValidation

Identifiers

PMID28551709
OpenAlexW4242426744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.