ArticlePloS one2025
Is reflux hypersensitivity truly a functional gastrointestinal disorder? A retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to Rome IV, reflux hypersensitivity (RH) represents a novel form of functional esophageal disorder. This study was designed to compare the clinical features of three types of endoscopic-negative heartburn: RH, nonerosive reflux disease (NERD), and functional heartburn (FH).
methodsPatients with heartburn in a medical center from 01/01/2017 to 10/31/2021 were included. This article presented a blinded retrospective analysis of 24 h MII-pH and HRM tracings from patients with NERD, RH, and FH to compare their clinical characteristics.
resultsA total of 118 patients were included in the study. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, smoking status, or drinking history among RH, NERD and FH. Functional dyspepsia (FD) symptoms were more prone to exist in FH than in NERD (P < 0.05), whereas hiatal hernia was more prevalent in NERD and RH than in FH (P < 0.05). The incidence of anxiety and depression gradually increased in the NERD, RH, and FH groups (P > 0.05). The distal MNBI and PSPW index of the NERD and RH groups were lower than those of the FH group (P < 0.05). The distal MNBI showed good diagnostic potential.
conclusionsClear pathological alterations, which are distinct from those of other FGIDs, are observable in RH. It might be inappropriate to categorize RHs within FGIDs.
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.