SynthesisJournal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition2025
Outcome reporting in studies of paediatric achalasia: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Outcome reporting in studies of paediatric achalasia: A systematic review.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Management and outcomes of paediatric achalasia: multicentre retrospective study in the UK.BJS open · 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
objectivesPaediatric achalasia is a rare condition associated with significant morbidity. A core outcome set (COS) would standardise reporting, enable comparison of data sets, and focus research efforts; ultimately improving care for children with achalasia. We aimed to identify outcomes currently reported in studies of paediatric achalasia to inform outcomes for a COS.
methodsA systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. Studies investigating children ≤18 years of age with a diagnosis of achalasia were included. Primary and secondary outcomes were recorded and assigned to OMERACT core areas. The study was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42024509855).
resultsSixty-two studies were included in this review, consisting of 54 retrospective and 8 prospective studies. Median cohort size was 20 patients (inter-quartile range: 13-28). Forty-eight unique outcomes were reported. The most common outcomes reported were intra-operative complications (65%, 40 studies), post-operative complications (58%, 36 studies) and length of stay (58%, 36 studies). A primary outcome was specified in 12 studies (19%), the most common was the Eckardt score (13%) in 8 studies. Studies least frequently reported outcomes in the death (21%, 13 studies) and pathophysiological manifestations (35%, 22 studies) core areas.
conclusionsThe studies included in this review were predominantly small and retrospective. Of the few studies that specified a primary outcome, the majority used the Eckardt score, which is unvalidated in children. Outcomes relevant to pathophysiological manifestations, life impact and survival were under-reported. A COS for paediatric achalasia, involving key stakeholders, would ensure that patient-relevant outcomes were reported, reduce heterogeneity and facilitate meta-analysis.
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.