ArticlePatient related outcome measures2020
Clinically Meaningful Difference for the Infant Gastroesophageal Questionnaire Revised version (I-GERQ-R): A Quantitative Synthesis.
Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Research progress and clinical practice considerations on assessment tools for gastroesophageal reflux disease in infants and young children].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2026Review
- Symptom Scores and pH-Impedance: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial in Infants Treated for Gastroesophageal Reflux.Gastro hep advances · 2022Article
- A comparison between a gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire-based algorithm and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux-induced chronic cough.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is a common condition affecting 30% of infants aged 0-23 months. The Infant Gastroesophageal Questionnaire Revised version (I-GERQ-R) is an observer-reported outcome measures (ObsRO) developed to evaluate the impact of GORD on young infants. However, evidence regarding the clinically important difference (CID) for the I-GERQ-R is limited. The aim of this study was to determine a CID for the I-GERQ-R.
methodsA literature review was undertaken (PsycInfo, Embase, MedLine and EconLit databases) for longitudinal studies involving the I-GERQ-R. Articles were not limited by language or publication date. A random effects model was applied to calculate an overall CID, along with I
resultsThe search identified 42 articles; 11 were selected for full-text review and 7 articles were identified for full data extraction. The studies included a total of 661 infants (range: 30 to 313); 424 infants had been diagnosed with GORD (64%). The age range of the infants across the studies was from birth to 7 months. The overall CID was -6.54 (95% confidence interval: -4.35 to -8.74), Q = 17.96, p=0.08 and I
conclusionThis study derived a CID for the I-GERQ-R and indicated a threshold around 6 could signify a clinically important difference for this instrument. The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval suggested a threshold of 3 to 4 could represent a minimally important difference. These results may help inform clinical decisions in evaluating meaningful change in symptom severity in children affected by GORD.
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.