ReviewClinical endoscopy2014
Screening for gastric cancer: the usefulness of endoscopy.
Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Social determinants and equity across the gastric cancer continuum in Vietnam: a narrative review.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- The "Hit-and-Run" legacy: epigenetic locking and the survival switch in H. pylori-associated gastric cancer.Cell death discovery · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance and Potential Harms of Population-Based Esophagogastroduodenoscopy for Gastric Cancer Screening.Gut and liver · 2026Article
- Epidemiology of Gastric Cancer in Korea (1999-2022): Incidence, Survival, and 5-Year Conditional Relative Survival.Journal of gastric cancer · 2026Article
- Deciphering the Risk of Developing Lung Cancer after the Diagnosis of Gastric Cancer with Genetic Evidence: A European and East Asian Populations-Based Mendelian Randomization Analysis.Cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Current Evidence, Practice, and Future Directions.Cureus · 2025Review
- Prognostic Value of the Level of Urine Dipstick Proteinuria in Gastric Cancer in the Korean Population.Cancers · 2025Article
- Gastric Cancer Surgery Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Turkey: A Multicenter Comparison of Prognostic Factors, Mortality, and Survival.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Burden of gastric cancer in Ecuador (2010-2021): a gender- and age-specific analysis using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).Frontiers in epidemiology · 2025Article
- Disparities in Overall Survival Rates for Cancers across Income Levels in the Republic of Korea.Cancers · 2024Article
- Trends analysis of cancer incidence, mortality, and survival for the elderly in the United States, 1975-2020.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Gastric cancer: an overview.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024Review
- Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors for Gastric Cancer.Cancer treatment and research · 2024Review
- Risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer and death in persons with negative screening results: results from the National Cancer Screening Program in South Korea.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2023Article
- Metachronous gastric neoplasm beyond 5 years after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Global burden of gastric cancer: epidemiological trends, risk factors, screening and prevention.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2023Review
- Identification of serum microRNAs as potential diagnostic biomarkers for detecting precancerous lesions of gastric cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic inequality in organized and opportunistic screening for gastric cancer: results from the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey 2009-2022.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastric cancer screening is common in countries with high prevalence rates of gastric cancer. However, data supporting the effectiveness of gastric cancer screening are lacking. Thus, the aim of this review was to examine the current evidence on gastric cancer screening. Herein, we reviewed radiographic and endoscopic tests as methods of gastric cancer screening. Previous cohort studies and case-control studies have demonstrated reduced gastric cancer mortality in study populations that had undergone gastric cancer screening with radiographic tests. Recently, a case-control study in Japan reported a 30% reduction in gastric cancer mortality when screening was undertaken via endoscopy. Also, endoscopic screening for gastric cancer exhibited higher sensitivity and specificity than radiographic screening. Moreover, most cost-effectiveness analyses on the best strategy for detecting early gastric cancer have generally concluded that endoscopy is more cost-effective than radiographic testing. Although data on the impact of endoscopy screening programs on gastric cancer mortality are limited, recent study results suggest that gastric cancer screening by endoscopy in average-risk populations performs better than radiography screening. Further evaluation of the impact of these screening methods should take into account cost and any associated reduction in gastric cancer mortality.
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.