ArticleBMJ open2026
Digital versus face-to-face gut-directed psychotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome: a protocol of systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder worldwide. Although not life-threatening, its chronic and recurrent nature greatly impacts patients' quality of life. There is strong evidence that gut-directed psychotherapies (GDPs) help improve IBS symptoms. With technological advances, digital GDP is increasingly used as an alternative to traditional face-to-face GDP. This study will compare the clinical effectiveness of digital versus face-to-face GDP for IBS through network meta-analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search English databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Web of Science) and Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, VIP and Chinese Biomedical Database) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of digital or face-to-face GDP for IBS. The search will cover the period from database inception to May 2025. We will perform multivariate network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework, using the mvmeta command in STATA V.16 software, and traditional pairwise meta-analysis using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool (V.2) will be used to assess the RoB of each RCT, and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) tool will be used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review, as it involves the collection and synthesis of data from previously published primary studies. OSF REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (OSF) registration: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/87463.
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.