Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 368

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical trial: a randomized‐controlled crossover study of intrapyloric injection of botulinum toxin in gastroparesis

Open access
ARTS, J., HOLVOET, L., CAENEPEEL, P., BISSCHOPS, R., SIFRIM, D., VERBEKE, K., JANSSENS, J., TACK, J.·2007·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Summary: Background Uncontrolled studies suggest benefit of intrapyloric injection of botulinum toxin (botox) for the treatment of gastroparesis, but controlled data are lacking. Aim To perform a controlled study of botox injection in gastroparesis. Methods Twenty‐three gastroparesis patients (five men, age 45 ± 3, 19 idiopathic) underwent two upper endoscopies with 4‐week interval, with injection of saline or botox 4 × 25 U in a randomized double‐blind‐controlled crossover fashion. Before the start of the study and 4 weeks after each treatment, they underwent a solid and liquid gastric emptying breath test with measurement of meal‐related symptom scores, and filled out the Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index. Results (mean S.E.M.) were compared using Student’s t ‐test. Results Twelve patients received botox and 11 saline as the first injection. Significant improvement in emptying and Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index was seen after initial injection of saline or botox. No further improvement occurred after the second injection (respectively, botox and saline). Pooled data for both treatment groups showed no significant difference in improvements of solid t 1/2 (3.4 ± 7.4 vs. 16.3 ± 8.3, N.S.) and liquid t 1/2 (8.2 ± 13.7 vs. 22.5 ± 7.7, N.S.), meal‐related symptom scores or Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptoms Index (GCSI; 6.1 ± 1.5 vs. 3.8 ± 1.5, N.S.). Conclusion In a cohort of predominantly idiopathic gastroparesis patients, botox is not superior to placebo in improving either symptoms or the rate of gastric emptying.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03467.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 368

Metadata

Authors
ARTS, J., HOLVOET, L., CAENEPEEL, P., BISSCHOPS, R., SIFRIM, D., VERBEKE, K., JANSSENS, J., & TACK, J.
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-08-22
Volume
26
Issue
9
Pages
1251-1258
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W1534561431
Cited by
368
References
3
FWCI
10.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical trial: a randomized‐controlled crossover study of intrapyloric injection of botulinum toxin in gastroparesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03467.x
The paper
ARTS, J., HOLVOET, L., CAENEPEEL, P., BISSCHOPS, R., SIFRIM, D., VERBEKE, K., JANSSENS, J., & TACK, J. (2007). Clinical trial: a randomized‐controlled crossover study of intrapyloric injection of botulinum toxin in gastroparesis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03467.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.