ArticlePloS one2017
The comparative analyses of different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guidelines on diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in infants, children and adolescents: a joint consensus from Italian pediatric societies (SIP and SIGENP) -part I. diagnosis.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2026Guideline
- Utility of the Post-Reflux Swallow-Induced Peristaltic Wave Index and Mean Nocturnal Baseline Impedance for the Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Phenotypes in Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Prevalence of Non-erosive Esophageal Phenotypes in Children: A European Multicenter Study.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Article
- Pharmacologic treatment of GERD in adolescents: Is esophageal mucosal protection an option?Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Bidirectional association between GERD and asthma in children: two longitudinal follow-up studies using a national sample cohort.Pediatric research · 2020Article
- The Spectrum of Reflux Phenotypes.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2019Article
- Mean platelet volume and red cell distribution width as potential new biomarkers in children with gastroesophageal reflux disease.American journal of translational research · 2019Article
- Gastroesophageal reflux in cystic fibrosis across the age spectrum.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2019Article
- Gastroesophageal reflux in children: an updated review.Drugs in context · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the different diagnostic approaches in detection of gastroesophageal reflux disease in children presented with symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease.
methodsThe study design was cross sectional. The study retrospectively included all children who underwent combined multiple intraluminal impedance and pH (pH-MII) monitoring due to gastrointestinal and/or extraesophageal symptoms suggesting gastroesophageal reflux disease at University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, from July 2012 to July 2016.
resultsA total of 218 (117 boys/101 girls), mean age 6.7 years (range 0.06-18.0 years), met the inclusion criteria. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was found in 128 of 218 children (57.4%) by pH-MII and in 76 (34.1%) children by pH metry alone. Using pH-MII monitoring as gold standard, sensitivity of pH-metry was lowest in infants (22.9%), with tendency to increase in older age groups (reaching 76.4% in children ≥ 9 years). The sensitivity of pH-metry alone in children with extraesophageal symptoms was 38.1%, while the sensitivity of pH-metry in children with gastrointestinal symptoms was 63.8%. Reflux esophagitis was identified in 31 (26.1%) of 119 children who underwent endoscopy. Logistic regression analysis showed that best predictors of endoscopic reflux esophagitis are the longest acid episode (OR = 1.52, p<0.05) and DeMeester reflux composite score (OR = 3.31, p<0.05). The significant cutoff values included DeMeester reflux composite score ≥ 29 (AUC 0.786, CI 0.695-0.877, p<0.01) and duration of longest acid reflux ≥ 18 minutes (AUC 0.784, CI 0.692-0.875, p<0.01).
conclusionsThe results of our study suggested that compared with pH-metry alone, pH-MII had significantly higher detection rate of gastroesophageal reflux disease, especially in infants. Our findings also showed that pH-MII parameters correlated significantly with the endoscopically confirmed erosive esophagitis.
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.