Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38168738›Full record

ReviewAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2024

Review article: Current status and future directions of ingestible electronic devices in gastroenterology.

Phoebe A Thwaites, Chu K Yao, Emma P Halmos, Jane G Muir, Rebecca E Burgell, Kyle J Berean, Kourosh Kalantar-Zadeh, Peter R Gibson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. An Edible HAdvanced healthcare materials · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Critical Review: The Past, Present, and Future of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO).JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 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
Emma P HalmosDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6063-5118
Jane G MuirDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6669-4004
Rebecca E BurgellDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1344-8336
Kyle J BereanAtmo Biosciences, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6022-8512
Kourosh Kalantar-ZadehFaculty of Engineering, School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6109-132X
Peter R GibsonDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Clinical School, Monash University and Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9108-1712

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in microelectronics have greatly expanded the capabilities and clinical potential of ingestible electronic devices.

aimTo provide an overview of the structure and potential impact of ingestible devices in development that are relevant to the gastrointestinal tract.

methodsWe performed a detailed literature search to inform this narrative review.

resultsTechnical success of ingestible electronic devices relies on the ability to miniaturise the microelectronic circuits, sensors and components for interventional functions while being sufficiently powered to fulfil the intended function. These devices offer the advantages of being convenient and minimally invasive, with real-time assessment often possible and with minimal interference to normal physiology. Safety has not been a limitation, but defining and controlling device location in the gastrointestinal tract remains challenging. The success of capsule endoscopy has buoyed enthusiasm for the concepts, but few ingestible devices have reached clinical practice to date, partly due to the novelty of the information they provide and also due to the challenges of adding this novel technology to established clinical paradigms. Nonetheless, with ongoing technological advancement and as understanding of their potential impact emerges, acceptance of such technology will grow. These devices have the capacity to provide unique insight into gastrointestinal physiology and pathophysiology. Interventional functions, such as sampling of tissue or luminal contents and delivery of therapies, may further enhance their ability to sharpen gastroenterological diagnoses, monitoring and treatment.

conclusionsThe development of miniaturised ingestible microelectronic-based devices offers exciting prospects for enhancing gastroenterological research and the delivery of personalised, point-of-care medicine.

Indexed as

Capsule EndoscopyGastroenterologyElectronicsGastrointestinal TractHumans

Identifiers

PMID38168738
PMCPMC10952964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.