ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Development of a Standard Tool of Pattern Identification for Functional Dyspepsia: A Cross-Sectional Study from Korea.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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.
- Machine learning-based prediction of herbal medicine response in functional dyspepsia: protocol for a randomized, assessor-blinded, multicenter trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Pilot Analysis of Bioparameters in Patients with Dyspepsia Accompanied by Abdominal Hardness: An Exploration ofHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Discovering the key symptoms for identifying patterns in functional dyspepsia patients: Doctor's decision and machine learning.Integrative medicine research · 2025Article
- Pattern Identification in Patients with Functional Dyspepsia Using Brain-Body Bio-Signals: Protocol of a Clinical Trial for AI Algorithm Development.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Identifying key features for determining the patterns of patients with functional dyspepsia using machine learning.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveThe diagnosis and treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD) require a systematic and tailored approach. In traditional Korean medicine (TKM), pattern-identification tools help analyze clinical information and guide treatment. This study aimed to develop a Korean version of the standard tool of pattern identification for functional dyspepsia (STPI-FD) and subsequently assess its reliability and validity.
methodsCommon patterns and symptoms were identified through a systematic review of the clinical studies conducted in Korea and China. An importance survey for each pattern and symptom was conducted using the Delphi method and refined through expert consensus. A draft STPI-FD comprising six patterns and 38 items was developed. Ninety-five patients with FD completed the STPI-FD along with the Visual Analog Scale, Total Dyspepsia Symptom scale, Single Dyspepsia Symptom scale, and Functional Dyspepsia-related Quality of Life questionnaire.
resultsTwo items were excluded from the STPI-FD due to their negative impact on reliability, resulting in a 36-item tool. The revised STPI-FD demonstrated high internal consistency, with an overall Cronbach's alpha of 0.942. In contrast, the Cronbach's alpha values for each pattern ranged from 0.7 to 0.9. To assess its validity, significant differences in the pattern characteristics and associated symptoms were confirmed, indicating its clinical relevance. Statistically significant positive correlations between the revised STPI-FD and other dyspepsia-related scales underscore the differentiation between patterns.
conclusionThe final STPI-FD is a moderately reliable and valid tool for diagnosing specific patterns in FD, supporting the selection of interventions and the evaluation of symptom improvement in patients treated with TKM.
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.