ReviewGastroenterology clinics of North America2022
Diagnostic Strategy and Tools for Identifying Defecatory Disorders.
Review in Gastroenterology clinics of North America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Value of the Anal Endoluminal Functional Luminal Imaging Probe for the Diagnosis of Anismus: An Exploratory Study.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- Enhancing clinical practice: The role of digital rectal examination in diagnosing functional defecation disorders.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry and Balloon Expulsion Test Outcomes in Functional Constipation: A Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Rectocele: Incidental or important? Observe or operate? Contemporary diagnosis and management in the multidisciplinary era.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Review
- Faecal incontinence in adults.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This article reviews the indications, techniques, interpretation, strengths, and weaknesses of tests (anal manometry, anal surface electromyography, rectal balloon expulsion test, barium and MRI defecography, assessment of rectal compliance and sensation, and colonic transit) that are used diagnose defecatory disorders in constipated patients. The selection of tests and the sequence in which they are performed should be individualized to and interpreted in the context of the clinical features. Because anorectal functions are affected by age, results should be interpreted with reference to age- and sex-matched normal values for the same technique.
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.