ReviewSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2019
What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about the management of irritable bowel syndrome?
Review in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2019. 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.
- ReFerm® a Fermented Oat Gruel Composition, Improves Colonic Barrier Function and Modulates Tricellulin Expression in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Trial
- Review
- Genome-wide analysis of 53,400 people with irritable bowel syndrome highlights shared genetic pathways with mood and anxiety disorders.Nature genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a clinical disorder associated with high socioeconomic burden. Despite its importance, management of IBS remains difficult and several interventions have been hypothesized as beneficial for this condition. This study identified and summarized all Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) about the effects of interventions for managing IBS patients. DESIGN AND
settingReview of systematic reviews, carried out in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina (EPM), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP).
methodsReview of Cochrane SRs addressing interventions for IBS.
resultsWe included six SRs assessing acupuncture, bulking agents, antispasmodics, antidepressants, herbal medicines, homeopathy, hypnotherapy and psychological therapy for IBS. The certainty of evidence ranged from unknown to moderate, mainly due to imprecision in the estimates and high risk of bias from the primary studies included. There was moderate certainty of evidence that acupuncture had no important benefit regarding improvement of symptoms and quality of life, compared with sham acupuncture. There was also very low certainty of evidence that homeopathic asafoetida, used alone or in association with nux, was better than placebo regarding self-reported overall improvement.
conclusionThere was moderate certainty of evidence that acupuncture had no important benefit regarding improvement of symptoms and quality of life. Further well-designed and well-conducted randomized clinical trials are needed in order to reduce the uncertainties regarding the most commonly used interventions for patients with IBS.
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.