The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Body Mass Index and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common cause of morbidity and health-care utilization in many countries. Obesity is a potentially modifiable risk factor, but existing studies have conflicting results, possibly due to differences in study design, definitions, or populations. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies identified using MEDLINE, the Web of Science electronic database, manual literature review, and a review of expert bibliographies. Studies were included if they: (1) evaluated obesity, body mass index (BMI), or another measure of body size; (2) included data on reflux symptoms, esophagitis, or a GERD-related hospitalization; and (3) reported a relative risk or odds ratio (OR) with confidence intervals or provided sufficient data to permit their calculation. RESULTS: We identified 20 studies that included 18,346 patients with GERD. Studies from the United States demonstrated an association between increasing BMI and the presence of GERD (95% confidence interval [CI]= 1.36-1.80, overweight, OR = 1.57, P value homogeneity = 0.51, 95% CI = 1.89-2.45, obese, OR = 2.15, P= 0.10). Studies from Europe provided heterogeneous results despite stratification for several factors; individual studies demonstrated both positive associations and no association. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates a positive association between increasing BMI and the presence of GERD within the United States; this relationship became apparent only after stratification by country and level of BMI. These results support the evaluation of weight reduction as a potential therapy for GERD. Further studies are needed to evaluate potential mechanisms and any differences in this relationship among different study populations.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533446 · Cited by 16,955
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309 · cited 1×
“Numerous criteria have been suggested for evaluating study quality; however, different scoring systems may yield substantially different results, raising concerns about validity (38, 41, 42).”
BackgroundThe Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
Janssen, I., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Boyce, W. F., Vereecken, C., Mulvihill, C., Roberts, C., Currie, C., Pickett, W., & The Health Behaviour in School‐Aged Children Obesity Working Group (2005) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1467-789x.2005.00176.x · Cited by 1,169
Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials
Chalmers, T. C., Celano, P., Sacks, H. S., & Smith, H. (1983) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198312013092204 · Cited by 864
Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods
Greenland, S. (1994) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117248 · Cited by 511
Wang, J.-H. (2004) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v10.i11.1647 · Cited by 188
Cited by
De Luca, M., Angrisani, L., Himpens, J., Busetto, L., Scopinaro, N., Weiner, R., Sartori, A., Stier, C., Lakdawala, M., Bhasker, A. G., et al. (2016) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-016-2271-4 · Cited by 296
Gastrointestinal Complications of Obesity
Camilleri, M., Malhi, H., & Acosta, A. (2017) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2016.12.052 · Cited by 269
Singh, M., Lee, J., Gupta, N., Gaddam, S., Smith, B. K., Wani, S. B., Sullivan, D. K., Rastogi, A., Bansal, A., Donnelly, J. E., et al. (2013) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.20279 · Cited by 195
Complications of bariatric surgery: Dumping syndrome, reflux and vitamin deficiencies
Tack, J., & Deloose, E. (2014) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/j.bpg.2014.07.010 · Cited by 181
Food and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
Surdea-Blaga, T., Negrutiu, D. E., Palage, M., & Dumitrascu, D. L. (2019) · Current Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.2174/0929867324666170515123807 · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Corley, D. A., & Kubo, A.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Gastroenterology
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2619-2628
- ISSN
- 0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-0241
- OpenAlex
- W2085842823
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 2.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Body Mass Index and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00849.x
- The paper
- Corley, D. A., & Kubo, A. (2006). Body Mass Index and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The American Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00849.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.