ArticleGastroenterology research2026
Mirtazapine in Treating Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Gastroenterology research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a disease of gut-brain interaction that impacts the quality of life of many patients with limited effective pharmacologic options. Neuromodulators are increasingly used for refractory symptoms, but the efficacy of mirtazapine remains poorly defined. Although multiple randomized trials have evaluated mirtazapine for FD, its effects have not previously been pooled in a focused meta-analysis. The objective of our study was to synthesize results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to clarify their efficacy in treating this condition. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was performed to identify studies evaluating mirtazapine for FD from inception through November 2025 (PROSPERO ID: CRD420251237233). Ninety-three records were identified through databases and two through additional sources. After removal of duplicates and screening of abstracts, six full-text articles were assessed. Three were excluded for lacking an appropriate control group or failing to meet predefined eligibility criteria, while three RCTs were included (n = 154). Study-level effect sizes comparing mirtazapine and control groups at the end of treatment were calculated and pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I Results: Across three RCTs, mirtazapine was associated with significantly lower FD symptom severity compared with control treatment. The pooled effect size demonstrated a large benefit, with a standardized mean difference of -1.39 (95% confidence interval (CI): -2.00 to -0.78). Heterogeneity was substantial (I Conclusion: Mirtazapine was associated with significantly lower symptom severity compared with control treatment across available RCTs of FD. Increased heterogeneity may reflect differences in dosing, patient selection, and study design. Despite this, sensitivity analyses indicate that the observed effect is robust. Given the limited therapeutic options for refractory FD, mirtazapine may warrant consideration in select patient populations. However, larger and more methodologically uniform trials are needed to better define its role before considering clinical use.
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.