ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2015
Endoscopic quality indicators for esophagogastroduodenoscopy in gastric cancer screening.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Summary of gastroscopy quality indicators applicable in clinical practice.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2025Review
- Variation in the rate of detection of minute and small early gastric cancers at diagnostic endoscopy may reflect the performance of individual endoscopists.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Observational
- Quality indicators in esophagogastroduodenoscopy.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Review
- Assessment of Cimetropium Bromide Use for the Detection of Gastric Neoplasms During Esophagogastroduodenoscopy.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Composite detection rate as an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy quality measure correlating with detection of neoplasia.Journal of gastroenterology · 2021Observational
- Application of artificial intelligence-driven endoscopic screening and diagnosis of gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Clinical risk stratification model for advanced colorectal neoplasia in persons with negative fecal immunochemical test results.PloS one · 2018Article
- Screening endoscopy for gastric cancer: time for quality control.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2017Article
- Performance measures for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy quality improvement initiative.United European gastroenterology journal · 2016Review
- Periodic Endoscopies Might Not Increase the Detection of Early Gastric Cancer in a Young Population.PloS one · 2016Article
- Understanding the Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Early Gastric Cancer.Gut and liver · 2016Article
- Feasibility of terahertz reflectometry for discrimination of human early gastric cancers.Biomedical optics express · 2015Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuality indicators of screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy are essential to improve the detection rate of gastric cancer. However, a reliable, practical indicator of the performance of endoscopists in screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy has not yet been identified.
aimsWe aimed to identify quality indicators of esophagogastroduodenoscopy for the detection of early gastric neoplasms, including gastric dysplasia and early gastric cancer, focusing on the endoscopic findings.
methodsThe records of 54,889 individuals who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy for gastric cancer screening at the Yonsei University Severance Hospital Health Promotion Center, Seoul, Korea, between February 2006 and July 2013 were analyzed. The detection rates for various gastric lesions including early gastric neoplasms were analyzed for each endoscopist.
resultsGastric dysplasia, early gastric cancer, and advanced gastric cancer were detected in 97 (0.18 %), 54 (0.10 %), and 21 (0.04 %) of 54,889 individuals, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that the detection rates of gastric subepithelial lesions and gastric diverticuli were independent factors associated with the detection rate of early gastric neoplasms (regression coefficients of 0.096 and 0.532, respectively). A quality score formula was deduced using these regression coefficients to predict the ability of an endoscopist to detect early gastric neoplasms. A trend test confirmed that the group of endoscopists with a higher quality score showed a significantly higher rate of early gastric neoplasm detection (P < 0.001).
conclusionsThe detection rates of gastric subepithelial lesions and gastric diverticuli are well correlated with that of early gastric neoplasms. In addition, the proposed quality scoring system could be a good quality indicator for the detection of early gastric neoplasms.
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.