SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018
Prokinetics for functional dyspepsia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 8 of them syntheses 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second Asian Consensus Report on Functional Dyspepsia (2025): Updated Recommendations.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Pooled it
- Non-Chinese herbal medicines for functional dyspepsia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Menthacarin, a Proprietary Peppermint Oil and Caraway Oil Combination, Improves Multiple Complaints in Patients with Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Guideline
- An approach to exploring patterns of imbalance and potential missingness in reports of the randomized baseline values for primary outcomes measurable at baseline in randomized controlled trials for meta-analyses.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for functional dyspepsia 2021.Journal of gastroenterology · 2022Guideline
- Efficacy of Acupuncture Treatment for Postprandial Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of immunology research · 2022Pooled it
- Prokinetics for functional dyspepsia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of Herbal Decoctions for Functional Dyspepsia in Korean Medicine Clinics: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of itopride on functional dyspepsia symptom progression: a multicenter noninterventional postregistration study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Functional dyspepsia redefined: evidence supporting inflammatory dyspepsia - a systematic review.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2026Review
- Recent Developments in Oral Drug Delivery of Prokinetic Agents: Nanoparticles and Beyond.Current drug delivery · 2026Review
- Efficacy of Acotiamide in Pediatric Patients with Functional Dyspepsia.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2025Article
- Overlap Between Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Functional Dyspepsia: Do We Need a New Management Paradigm?Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Article
- Dietary microbes and functional dyspepsia: modulating the gut microecology for therapeutic benefit.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Comparison and Determination of the Content of Mosapride Citrate by Different qNMR Methods.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Clinical Trial: Efficacy of Mosapride Controlled-release and Nortriptyline in Patients With Functional Dyspepsia: A Multicenter, Double-placebo, Double-blinded, Randomized Controlled, Parallel Clinical Study.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024Article
- Comparison of enteral prucaloprideFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Pharmacological Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: An Old Story Revisited or a New Story to Be Told? A Clinical Review.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDyspepsia is a common condition associated with gastrointestinal (GI) disease. Prokinetics are the treatment of choice for functional dyspepsia (FD). However, the role of prokinetics in FD treatment is still controversial.
objectivesWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy of prokinetics in the treatment of FD. The primary outcome was overall absence of or improvement of symptoms and symptom scores at the end of treatment. We also evaluated quality of life (QoL) and adverse events as secondary outcomes. SEARCH
methodsWe performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL, from 1946 until September 2017. RevMan 5.3 was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) of symptoms persisting or without improved QoL or adverse events, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) of post-treatment symptoms scores, changes of symptom scores, and QoL, when appropriate with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using a random-effects model. Quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE methodology. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that were parallel group RCTs comparing one prokinetic with either placebo or another prokinetic of the same or different class for the treatment of FD. Studies involved adults who presented with dyspepsia symptoms and who had negative or insignificant findings on endoscopy as well as no other organic and metabolic disorders. Studies only including participants with primarily reflux or heartburn symptoms were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, study quality and performed data extraction. MAIN
resultsFrom an initial 1388 citations, we identified 43 studies in 40 papers. Of those, 29 studies with 10,044 participants compared six prokinetics with placebo for the outcome of absence of symptoms or symptom improvement. There was a statistically significant effect of prokinetic treatment in reducing global symptoms of FD (RR of remaining dyspeptic = 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.89; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) =7, very low-quality evidence) with considerable heterogeneity; I AUTHORS'
conclusionsDue to low, or very low, quality of evidence, we are unable to say whether prokinetics are effective for the treatment of functional dyspepsia . We are uncertain which of the individual prokinetic drugs is the most effective as well as whether prokinetics can improve quality of life. Apart from cisapride, prokinetics are well-tolerated. Good quality RCTs are needed to verify the efficacy of prokinetics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.