Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36082475›Full record

ArticleAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2022

Comparison of gastrointestinal landmarks using the gas-sensing capsule and wireless motility capsule.

Phoebe A Thwaites, Chu K Yao, Jasjot Maggo, James John, Adam F Chrimes, Rebecca E Burgell, Jane G Muir, Francis C Parker, Daniel So, Kourosh Kalantar-Zadeh and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Multi-region sampling of the human small intestine using an ingestible device.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Phoebe A ThwaitesDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5250-2086
Chu K YaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5301-2457
Jasjot MaggoUniversity of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand.
James JohnAtmo Biosciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Adam F ChrimesAtmo Biosciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Rebecca E BurgellDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1344-8336
Jane G MuirDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Francis C ParkerDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Daniel SoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9560-4469
Kourosh Kalantar-ZadehSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6109-132X
Richard B GearryUniversity of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-2298-5141
Kyle J BereanAtmo Biosciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6022-8512
Peter R GibsonDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9108-1712

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate definition of the gastroduodenal and ileocaecal junctions (GDJ, ICJ) is essential for the measurement of regional transit times.

aimsTo compare the assessment of these landmarks using the novel gas-sensing capsule and validated wireless motility capsule (WMC), and to evaluate intra-subject variance in transit times

methodsHealthy subjects ingested the gas-sensing capsule and WMC tandemly in random order. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement between the paired devices' transit times was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis; coefficient of variation was performed to express intra-individual variance in transit times. Similar analyses were completed with tandemly ingested gas-sensing capsules.

resultsThe inter-observer agreement for landmarks for both capsules was excellent (mean ICC ≥0.97) in 50 studies. The GDJ was identifiable in 92% of the gas-sensing capsule studies versus 82% of the WMC studies (p = 0.27); the ICJ in 96% versus 84%, respectively (p = 0.11). In the primary cohort (n = 26), median regional transit times differed by less than 6 min between paired capsules. Bland-Altman revealed a bias of -0.12 (95% limits of agreement, -0.94 to 0.70) hours for GDJ and - 0.446 (-2.86 to 2.0) hours for ICJ. Similar results were found in a demographically distinct validation cohort (n = 24). For tandemly ingested gas-sensing capsules, coefficients of variation of transit times were 11%-35%, which were similar to variance between the paired gas-sensing capsule and WMC, as were the biases. The capsules were well tolerated.

conclusionsKey anatomical landmarks are accurately identified with the gas-sensing capsule in healthy individuals. Intra-individual differences in transit times between capsules are probably due to physiological factors. Studies in populations with gastrointestinal diseases are now required.

Indexed as

Capsule EndoscopyGastrointestinal DiseasesCapsulesGastrointestinal MotilityGastrointestinal TransitHealthy VolunteersHumansCapsules

Identifiers

PMID36082475
PMCPMC9826325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.