ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2014
Efficacy of i-Scan Imaging for the Detection and Diagnosis of Early Gastric Carcinomas.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
- Global progress and future prospects of early gastric cancer screening.Journal of Cancer · 2024Review
- Advances in the Aetiology & Endoscopic Detection and Management of Early Gastric Cancer.Cancers · 2021Review
- Tri-Scan: A Three Stage Color Enhancement Tool for Endoscopic Images.Journal of medical systems · 2017Article
- Advanced endoscopic imaging in gastric neoplasia and preneoplasia.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We determined comparative efficacy of i-Scan for detection and diagnosis of gastric cancer. Ten patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer based on histopathological findings were analyzed. White light and i-Scan moving images recorded from these patients in twin mode were separated into white light and i-Scan. Twelve endoscopists (three different skill levels) blinded to patient information evaluated the images. Correlation between demarcation accuracy and lesion brightness on still images was investigated. No significant differences were found in diagnostic accuracy between white light and i-Scan moving images for tumor detection rate (91.7% versus 90.8%, P = 0.777). Diagnostic accuracy of tumor size was comparable between novice and experienced endoscopists for i-Scan moving images (65.7% versus 71.1%, P = 0.528), whereas it was significantly lower for white light moving images (41.2% versus 79.5%, P = 0.019). Tumor demarcation accuracy was significantly better with white light than i-Scan still images (71.0% versus 65.8%, P = 0.033). Correlations between demarcation accuracy and brightness reached highs of 0.75 for white light and 0.89 for i-Scan imaging. Efficacy of i-Scan over that of white light imaging for detecting and diagnosing gastric cancer was not shown; however, the diagnostic capability of i-Scan can be improved if imaging conditions are optimized.
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.