ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Comparison of strategies and goals for treatment of chronic constipation among gastroenterologists and general practitioners.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy of extra virgin olive oil versus refined olive oil in the treatment of individuals suffering from constipation: A double-blind randomized clinical trial study.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2025Article
- Perceptions of and Practices for the Management of Constipation: Results of a Korean National Survey.Gut and liver · 2024Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Elobixibat, an Ileal Bile Acid Transporter Inhibitor, in Elderly Patients With Chronic Idiopathic Constipation According to Administration Time: Interim Analysis of Post-marketing Surveillance.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Article
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
backgroundAlthough guidelines have been published for the treatment of chronic constipation, little is known about the actual treatment strategies, the definitions of drug efficacy, the parameters for drug selection, and the conceived limitations of the available treatments. The purpose of this study was to address these issues by comparing treatment strategies among gastroenterology specialists (GIs) and general practitioners (GPs).
methodsAn internet survey was sent nationwide and at random to GIs and GPs in order to define treatment strategies, drug efficacy, main parameters for drug selections and the main limitations of the available drug therapy.
resultsForty GIs and 132 GPs answered the survey. The maximal sample error was ±13.4% and ±8.8%. Treatment strategies varied considerably between GPs and GIs. The major parameters for drug selection were related to drug safety among GIs and to clinical outcome among GPs. The conceived limitations of drug therapy included lack of experience and unwanted side effects.
conclusionsAwareness of the possible treatment options and the recommended order of prescription differs between GIs and GPs. There are still unmet needs for optimizing the treatment for chronic constipation.
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.