Trial reportDigestive diseases and sciences2014
Screening for Barrett's esophagus: results from a population-based survey.
Trial report in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A randomized comparative effectiveness trial of novel endoscopic techniques and approaches for Barrett's esophagus screening in the community.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2015Trial
- Public Preference Heterogeneity and Predicted Uptake Rate of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Screening Programs in Rural China: Discrete Choice Experiments and Latent Class Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- Dutch individuals' views of screening for oesophageal cancer: a focus group study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Public acceptance and uptake of oesophageal adenocarcinoma screening strategies: A mixed-methods systematic review.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Validation of a methylated DNA marker panel for the nonendoscopic detection of Barrett's esophagus in a multisite case-control study.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021Article
- Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Upper gastrointestinal tract capsule endoscopy using a nurse-led protocol: First reported experience.World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Recent Advances in Non-invasive Esophageal Tissue Sampling.Current gastroenterology reports · 2017Review
- Recent developments in pathogenesis, diagnosis and therapy of Barrett's esophagus.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and adenocarcinoma (EAC) is controversial, but interest remains in finding the optimal method. Attitudes on screening within the community are unknown. We aimed to assess these attitudes via a survey. STUDY: A mixed-mode survey was conducted in adults >50 years to assess awareness regarding BE, willingness to participate in screening, and preferences regarding method of screening. Methods evaluated were sedated endoscopy (sEGD), unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) and video capsule (VCE).
resultsA total of 136 from 413 (33%) adults responded [47% males, mean (SD) age 63 (10.2) years], and 26% of responders knew of BE at baseline. After reading the information on BE, 72% were interested in screening. A history of undergoing screening tests and GI symptoms were predictive of interest. Unsedated techniques were preferred by 64% (VCE: 56% and uTNE: 8%) versus sEGD (36%).
conclusionsThe majority of adults were willing to undergo screening for BE/EAC, with a preference for unsedated techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.