Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract only checked★ key study I-SOD-01 in-depth review

Fizzy drinks and reflux: systematic review

Systematic review: the effects of carbonated beverages on gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Overview

Johnson T et al.. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010 · PMID 20055784 · DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04232.x

Fizzy drinks briefly lower acidity in the food pipe, but there is no direct evidence that they cause reflux disease.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Do carbonated beverages affect oesophageal pH, motility, damage, GERD symptoms and complications?

How was the study done?

Systematic review (qualitative).

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

Not stated in abstract; Not stated in abstract

What was actually found?

Very short decline in intra-oesophageal pH; possible transient reduction of LES basal pressure; no evidence of direct oesophageal damage; not consistently shown to cause GERD symptoms; no evidence of GERD complications or oesophageal cancer.

How large was the observed effect?

Not pooled

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Fizzy drinks are not a proven cause of reflux disease.

What are the study's limitations?

Old (2010); Limited primary evidence; No meta-analysis

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Contradicts C-SOD-12, C-SOD-13, C-SOD-14.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

High.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

That nobody gets symptoms from them.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Johnson T et al.
Journal
Aliment Pharmacol Ther
Year
2010
Identifier
PMID 20055784 DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04232.x
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

Not stated in abstract

2. Research question

Do carbonated beverages affect oesophageal pH, motility, damage, GERD symptoms and complications?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Systematic review – Systematic review (qualitative).
Population

Not stated in abstract

Country

Multinational

Period

not stated in abstract

Sample size

Not stated in abstract

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

not stated in abstract

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Carbonated beverages

Comparator

Non-carbonated/none

Endpoints

Oesophageal pH, LES pressure, damage, symptoms, complications

Statistical methods

Narrative synthesis

5. Actual results

Results

Very short decline in intra-oesophageal pH; possible transient reduction of LES basal pressure; no evidence of direct oesophageal damage; not consistently shown to cause GERD symptoms; no evidence of GERD complications or oesophageal cancer.

Absolute risks

not applicable

Authors' conclusion

No direct evidence that carbonated beverages promote or exacerbate GERD.

6. Strengths

  • Systematic

7. Weaknesses

  • Old (2010)
  • Limited primary evidence
  • No meta-analysis

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
AMSTAR 2
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Qualitative synthesis.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Not applicable.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Contradicts C-SOD-12, C-SOD-13, C-SOD-14.

11. Independent contrary findings

Transient physiological effects exist.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

High.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Best available summary on soda and GERD.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsnot applicable
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilityunknown
Consistency with the overall evidencemixed
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Effects in GERD patients specifically.

15. Linked fact checks