ArticleCancer research and treatment2015
Optimal Interval for Repeated Gastric Cancer Screening in Normal-Risk Healthy Korean Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term adherence to gastric cancer screening in South Korea: A 10-year follow-up study.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025Article
- Current therapeutic options for gastric adenocarcinoma.Saudi journal of biological sciences · 2021Review
- Comparison of gastric cancer survival after R0 resection in the US and China.Journal of surgical oncology · 2018Article
- Does the interval of screening endoscopy affect survival in gastric cancer patients?: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2016Article
- DNA Methylation as Surrogate Marker For Gastric Cancer.Journal of cancer prevention · 2015Review
- Rates of change to a positive result in subsequent screening mammography in Korean women: a retrospective observational study.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2015Observational
- Methodological issues for determining intervals of subsequent cancer screening.Epidemiology and health · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective cohort study was conducted to estimate the optimal interval for gastric cancer screening in Korean adults with initial negative screening results. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study consisted of voluntary Korean screenees aged 40 to 69 years who underwent subsequent screening gastroscopies after testing negative in the baseline screening performed between January 2007 and December 2011. A new case was defined as the presence of gastric cancer cells in biopsy specimens obtained upon gastroscopy. The follow-up periods were calculated during the months between the date of baseline screening gastroscopy and positive findings upon subsequent screenings, stratified by sex and age group. The mean sojourn time (MST) for determining the screening interval was estimated using the prevalence/incidence ratio.
resultsOf the 293,520 voluntary screenees for the gastric cancer screening program, 91,850 (31.29%) underwent subsequent screening gastroscopies between January 2007 and December 2011. The MSTs in men and women were 21.67 months (95% confidence intervals [CI], 17.64 to 26.88 months) and 15.14 months (95% CI, 9.44 to 25.85 months), respectively.
conclusionThese findings suggest that the optimal interval for subsequent gastric screening in both men and women is 24 months, supporting the 2-year interval recommended by the nationwide gastric cancer screening program.
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.