SynthesisPloS one2022
Epidemiology of aerophagia in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical efficacy of simethicone combined with bifidobacterium in the treatment of pediatric aerophagia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Incidence and characterization of aerophagia in dogs using videofluoroscopic swallow studies.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAerophagia is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder among children. The disease leads to symptoms related to air in the intestine leading to burping, abdominal distension, and excessive flatus. We aimed to perform a systematic review and a meta-analysis to assess the epidemiology of aerophagia in children.
methodsWe conducted a thorough electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science) search for all epidemiological surveys conducted in children on aerophagia. All selected studies were assessed for their scientific quality and the extracted data were pooled to create a pooled prevalence of aerophagia.
resultsThe initial search identified 76 titles. After screening and in depth reviewing, 19 studies representing data from 21 countries with 40129 children and adolescents were included in the meta-analysis. All studies have used standard Rome definitions to diagnose aerophagia. The pooled prevalence of aerophagia was 3.66% (95% Confidence interval 2.44-5.12). There was significant heterogeneity between studies [I2 98.06% with 95% Confidence interval 97.70-98.37). There was no gender difference in prevalence of aerophagia in children. The pooled prevalence of aerophagia was highest in Asia (5.13%) compared to other geographical regions.
conclusionIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found aerophagia has a significant prevalence across the world.
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.