Back

Breathing exercises for the management of gastrointestinal conditions: protocol for a scoping review

Gholamrezaei, A.; Guadagnoli, L.; Teugels, A.; Peluso, N.; Fung, A.; Van Oudenhove, L.; Van Diest, I.; Vlaeyen, J.; Tack, J.; Vanuytsel, T.; Aziz, Q.; Talley, N. J.; Keefer, L.

2023-11-01 gastroenterology
10.1101/2023.10.31.23297871 medRxiv
Show abstract

1.ObjectivesThis scoping review will identify and map the literature on breathing exercises for the management of gastrointestinal conditions. IntroductionEmerging evidence suggests the potential benefits of breathing exercises for gastrointestinal conditions. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive review to systematically map the research done in this area, as well as to identify existing gaps in knowledge and guide future research. Inclusion criteriaThe review will consider any study that describes or evaluates a breathing exercise to manage a gastrointestinal condition or symptom in a patient population. Original studies including controlled clinical trials and observational studies (e.g., on patients experience), systematic reviews, scoping reviews, meta-analyses or any other form of systematic evidence synthesis, and case series will be sourced from published literature, gray literature, and the references of retrieved articles. Case reports, narrative reviews, letters, comments, editorials, and experimental studies including a healthy population only will be excluded. MethodsThe review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual for the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. Databases to be searched will include PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, and databases for gray literature. All databases will be searched from inception till the present. Retrieved citations will be independently reviewed, relevant studies will be included, and data will be extracted using a data extraction form. The results will be presented in tabular format, accompanied by a narrative summary and figures.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.