ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2020
Evaluation and Validation of the Modified Reflux Symptom Questionnaire-Electronic Diary in Patients With Persistent Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.
Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02637557 (A Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Dose-range-finding Trial of IW-3718 Administered Orally for 8 Weeks to Patients With Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Not Completely Responsive to Proton Pump Inhibitors), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
A Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Dose-range-finding Trial of IW-3718 Administered Orally for 8 Weeks to Patients With Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Not Completely Responsive to Proton Pump Inhibitors
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Trial: Dose-Finding Study of Linaprazan Glurate, A Novel Potassium-Competitive Acid Blocker, Versus Lansoprazole for the Treatment of Erosive Oesophagitis.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2025Trial
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to examine the validity of the modified Reflux Symptom Questionnaire-electronic Diary (mRESQ-eD) through patient input and psychometric testing of the questionnaire to support use in clinical trials in patients with persistent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and in accordance with Food and Drug Administration guidance on patient-reported outcome instruments.
methodsCognitive interviews were conducted with patients (n = 30) to evaluate the interpretability and content validity of draft mRESQ-eD items. Patient data from a phase 2b clinical study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02637557) on persistent GERD served to aid in the construction of weekly scores for heartburn severity, regurgitation severity, and total GERD severity. These scores' psychometric properties were also evaluated.
resultsMinor modifications were made to the draft mRESQ-eD based on patient feedback to improve interpretability and clarity of the instrument. Psychometric analysis suggested that an 8-item version of the mRESQ-eD was best suited to the clinical data. The internal consistency was found to be high (Coefficient ω = 0.95). Retest reliability and convergent validity were strong for a heartburn weekly severity score, regurgitation weekly severity score, and total GERD severity score. DISCUSSION: The final 8-item mRESQ-eD is a reliable and valid instrument with good psychometric properties for use in clinical trials in patients with persistent GERD. The mRESQ-eD may be considered for inclusion in clinical trials for persistent GERD and potentially positioned, in consultation with Food and Drug Administration, as endpoints to characterize treatment benefit.
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.