CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Colorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionGastrointestinal motility and disordersEnhanced Recovery After Surgery

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bowel preparation for elective procedures in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Gordon, Morris, Karlsen, Fiona, Isaji, Sahira, Teck, Guan-Ong·2017·BMJ Paediatrics Open
DOI 10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000118PMC PMC5862165
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Reviews have investigated preparation for colonoscopy, but not for surgery, They are also often limited to patients up to 16 years, despite many paediatric gastroenterologists caring for older patients. We carried out a systematic review investigating the optimum bowel preparation agents for all indications in children and young people. DESIGN: A Cochrane format systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. PATIENTS: Young people requiring bowel preparation for any elective procedure, as defined by the primary studies. INTERVENTIONS: RCTs comparing bowel preparation with placebo or other interventions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adequacy of bowel preparation, tolerability and adverse events. RESULTS: The search yielded 2124 results and 15 randomised controlled studies (n=1435)but heterogeneity limited synthesis. Meta-analysis of two studies comparing polyethylene glycol (PEG) with sodium phosphate showed no difference in the quality of bowel preparation (risk ratio (RR) 1.27(95% CI 0.66 to 2.44)). Two studies comparing sodium picosulfate/magnesium citrate with PEG found no difference in bowel preparation but significantly higher number of patients needing nasogastric tube insertion in the polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution (RR 0.04(95% CI 0.01 to 0.18), 45 of 117 in PEG group vs 2 of 121 in sodium picosulfate group). Meta-analysis of three studies (n=241) found no difference between PEG and sennasoids (RR 0.73(95% CI 0.31 to 1.71)). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base is clinically heterogeneous and methodologically at risk of bias. There is evidence that all regimens are equally effective. However, sodium picosulfate was better tolerated than PEG. Future research is needed with all agents and should seek to consider safety and tolerability as well as efficacy.

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 · 10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000118

Cites

20 of 20 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Gordon, M., Karlsen, F., Isaji, S., & Teck, G.-O.
Affiliations
  • University of Lancashire (GB)
  • Blackpool Victoria Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Gordon, Morris
ORCID
Gordon, Morris
Venue
BMJ Paediatrics Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2017-09
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
e000118
ISSN
2399-9772 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000118
PMC
PMC5862165
OpenAlex
W2745365492
Cited by
25
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Paediatrics Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
Keywords
bowel preparation, pediatric surgery, elective procedures, polyethylene glycol, sodium phosphate, sodium picosulfate, bowel preparation adequacy, tolerability, adverse events, nasogastric tube insertion

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