ReviewUpdates in surgery2018
Evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Review in Updates in surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence for surgical management of benign esophageal disease: scoping review and evidence mapping.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Reflections on surgery for hiatal hernia.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- Current pharmacological and procedural treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: comprehensive review.BJS open · 2025Review
- Quality of life and severity of symptoms among patients with various degrees of reflux esophagitis: a prospective study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Prevalence of non-obstructive dysphagia in patients with heartburn and regurgitation.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2020Article
- Gastrointestinal diagnosis using non-white light imaging capsule endoscopy.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2019Review
- Evidence-Based Practice Guideline for Surgical Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease 2018.Journal of gastric cancer · 2018Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may present with a variety of symptoms, including heartburn, regurgitation, dysphagia, chronic cough, laryngitis, or even asthma. Therefore, the clinical presentation of GERD varies among individuals and conversely symptoms not always correspond to the presence of actual reflux. For that reason, the diagnosis poses certain challenges to the physician. To overcome these challenges, a thorough clinical examination followed by objective functional testing could improve diagnostic accuracy. In addition, a proper evaluation of patients with GERD can help in identifying those who will likely benefit the most from an antireflux procedure. The diagnostic work-up of these patients should include: symptomatic evaluation, upper endoscopy, barium swallow, high-resolution manometry, and ambulatory pH monitoring. Once a proper diagnosis of GERD is achieved, antireflux surgery is an excellent option for patients with partial control of symptoms with medication, for patients who do not want to be on long-term medical treatment (compliance/cost), or when complications of medical treatment occur.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30039279What 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.