Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26361416›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2015

Value of screening endoscopy in evaluation of esophageal, gastric and colon cancers.

Tae H Ro, Michelle A Mathew, Subhasis Misra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Appendix orifice polyps: a study of 691 lesions at a single institution.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tae H RoTae H Ro, Michelle A Mathew, Subhasis Misra, Division of Surgical Oncology, Texas Tech University Health Science Center School of Medicine, Amarillo, TX 79106, United States.
Michelle A MathewTae H Ro, Michelle A Mathew, Subhasis Misra, Division of Surgical Oncology, Texas Tech University Health Science Center School of Medicine, Amarillo, TX 79106, United States.
Subhasis MisraTae H Ro, Michelle A Mathew, Subhasis Misra, Division of Surgical Oncology, Texas Tech University Health Science Center School of Medicine, Amarillo, TX 79106, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancers are deadly diseases that continue to plague our world today. The value of screening endoscopy in evaluating these types of cancers is a critical area of discussion due to a potential reduction in morbidity and mortality. This article describes how to identify a good screening test and explains what are important criteria in the field of screening endoscopy. Furthermore, the current status and progress of screening endoscopy for esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer will be evaluated and discussed. Mass screening programs have not been implemented for esophageal and gastric carcinomas in those with average or low risk populations. However, studies of high-risk populations have found value and a cost-benefit in conducting screening endoscopy. Colorectal cancer, on the other hand, has had mass screening programs in place for many years due to the clear evidence of improved outcomes. As the role of endoscopy as a screening tool has continued to develop, newer technology and techniques have emerged to improve its utility. Many new image enhancement techniques and computer processing programs have shown promise and may have a significant role in the future of endoscopic screening. These developments are paving the way for improving the diagnostic and therapeutic capability of endoscopy in the field of gastroenterology.

Indexed as

Endoscopy, GastrointestinalColonic NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerEsophageal NeoplasmsHealth Care CostsHumansPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisRisk FactorsStomach NeoplasmsColon cancerEndoscopic screeningEsophageal cancerEsophagogastroduodenoscopyGastric cancer

Identifiers

PMID26361416
PMCPMC4562953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.