ArticleNeurogastroenterology and motility2023
Inter- and intra-rater agreement of interpretation of functional lumen imaging probe in healthy subjects.
Article in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2023. 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.
- Accuracy of Novice Raters for Esophageal Motility Classifications Using Functional Lumen Imaging Probe Panometry.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- A Software Framework for the Functional Lumen Imaging Probe-Mechanics (MechView).Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Article
- Correlation Between Gastrojejunal Anastomosis Diameter, Distensibility Index, and Weight Regain After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) evaluates esophagogastric junction (EGJ) opening and esophageal contractility. Both post hoc and real-time analyses are possible, but reproducibility and reliability of analysis remain undefined. This study assesses inter- and intra-rater agreement of normative FLIP measurements among novice and experienced users.
methodsEight motility experts from different institutions independently evaluated de-identified video recordings from 27 asymptomatic healthy subjects using FLIP. Interpretation methods simulating a post-procedure and a live procedure setting were tested. Novice FLIP users (n = 3) received training prior to post-procedure interpretation. Experienced FLIP users (n = 5) interpreted using both methods. Users recorded maximum EGJ and distal esophageal body diameter, distensive pressure, and EGJ distensibility index (EGJ-DI), at balloon fill volumes of 50-, 60-, and 70 ml, as well as repetitive antegrade contractions (RACs). Inter- and intra-rater agreements of diameters, distensive pressure and EGJ-DI were assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC). Percentage agreement evaluated inter- and intra-rater reliability for RACs. KEY
resultsNovice and experienced users acquired normative FLIP metrics. Good-to-excellent inter- and intra-rater reliability were achieved for all variables at 60 ml balloon fill volumes. Median parameters at 60 ml balloon fill volume were as follows: EGJ-DI 5.5 mm CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Normative FLIP parameters can be reliably extracted from FLIP videos using both real-time and post hoc analyses, with high reliability between experienced and novice users.
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.