ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2016
Adherence to therapy for Barrett's esophagus-associated neoplasia.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Residing in Below Median Household Income Districts on Outcomes in Patients with Advanced Barrett's Esophagus.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Precision care for Barrett's esophagus.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2018Review
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
objectivesMultiple endoscopic sessions may be necessary for treatment and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated neoplasia. Adherence to an endoscopic therapeutic regimen is important for longitudinal management of BE. The objective of this study was to identify the factors associated with adherence to therapy for BE-associated neoplasia.
methodsWe retrospectively identified patients with BE whom were referred to a tertiary center for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) between 2009 and 2012. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the medical record.
resultsWe had 69 subjects meet our inclusion criteria. Referral diagnosis was low-grade dysplasia in 9 (13%) subjects, high-grade dysplasia in 33 (48%) subjects and adenocarcinoma in 26 (38%) subjects. The majority (55%) lived more than 100 miles from the treatment center. The primary third-party payer was US Medicare for 54% of the subjects and private insurance for 36% of them; 45% of the subjects were seen in the clinic by the treating endoscopist, prior to endoscopic therapy and 71% underwent EMR as the initial treatment, while 29% underwent RFA without prior EMR. We found that 72% of subjects were adherent to therapy, including: 23 (33%) completing endoscopic therapy with documented post-treatment surveillance, 18 (26%) with ongoing endoscopic therapy, and 9 (13%) whom underwent esophagectomy. Subjects seen in gastroenterology clinical consultation were significantly more likely to demonstrate adherence than those referred for open access endoscopy (Lasso OR 2.31).
conclusionsPatients seen in a clinical consultation prior to endoscopic therapy for BE-associated neoplasia were more likely to demonstrate treatment adherence, compared to patients referred for open-access endoscopy. A clinic visit prior to therapy may define expectations regarding treatment course and increase the likelihood of patient adherence.
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.