ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2018
Insights into the evaluation and management of dyspepsia: recent developments and new guidelines.
Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of moderate aerobic exercises on symptoms of functional dyspepsia.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2021Trial
- Dyspepsia in nonagenarian women.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
- A Non-Pharmacological Paradigm Captures the Complexity in the Mechanism of Action of Poliprotect Against Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Dyspepsia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Application and value of anxiety and depression scale in patients with functional dyspepsia.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Gastroscopy for dyspepsia: Understanding primary care and gastroenterologist mental models of practice: A cognitive task analysis approach.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Article
- Design characteristics of comparative effectiveness trials for the relief of symptomatic dyspepsia: A systematic review.Integrative medicine research · 2021Review
- Guideline Adherence in Dyspepsia Investigation and Treatment.Kansas journal of medicine · 2020Article
- Pathogenetic approach to the treatment of functional disorders of the gastrointestinal tract and their intersection: results of the Russian observation retrospective program COMFORT.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Observational
- A Combination of Peppermint Oil and Caraway Oil for the Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dyspepsia is a very common gastrointestinal (GI) condition worldwide. We critically examine the recommendations of recently published guidelines for the management of dyspepsia, including those produced jointly by the American College of Gastroenterology and the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, and those published by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Dyspepsia is a symptom complex, characterized by a range of upper GI symptoms including epigastric pain or burning, early satiety, and post-prandial fullness. Although alarm features are used to help prioritize access to upper GI endoscopy, they are of limited utility in predicting endoscopic findings, and the majority of patients with dyspepsia will have no organic pathology identified at upper GI endoscopy. These patients are labelled as having functional dyspepsia (FD). The Rome IV criteria, which are used to define FD, further subclassify patients with FD as having either epigastric pain syndrome or post-prandial distress syndrome, depending on their predominant symptoms. Unfortunately, the Rome criteria perform poorly at identifying FD without the need for upper GI endoscopy. This has led to the investigation of alternative diagnostic approaches, including whether a capsaicin pill or combined serum biomarkers can accurately identify patients with FD. However, there is insufficient evidence to support either of these approaches at the present time. Patients with FD should be tested for H. pylori infection and be prescribed eradication therapy if they test positive. If they continue to have symptoms following this, then a trial of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) should be given for up to 8 weeks. In cases where symptoms fail to adequately respond to PPI treatment, a tricyclic antidepressant may be of benefit, and should be continued for 6 to 12 months in patients who respond. Prokinetics demonstrate limited efficacy for treating FD, but could be considered if other strategies have failed. However, there are practical difficulties due to their limited availability in some countries and the risk of serious side effects. Patients with FD who fail to respond to drug treatments should be offered psychological therapy, where available. Overall, with the exception of recommendations relating to H. pylori testing and the prescription of PPIs, which are made on the basis of high-quality evidence, the evidence underpinning other elements of dyspepsia management is largely of low-quality. Consequently, there are still many aspects of the evaluation and management of dyspepsia that require further research.
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.