ReviewWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2017
Overdiagnosis of gastric cancer by endoscopic screening.
Review in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Gastric cancer in patients with gastric atrophy and intestinal metaplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Radiographic and endoscopic screening to reduce gastric cancer mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Identification of serum microRNAs as potential diagnostic biomarkers for detecting precancerous lesions of gastric cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Gastric Cancer Screening in Japan: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- A study protocol for expanding the screening interval of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer based on individual risks: prospective cohort study of gastric cancer screening.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- The burden of gastric cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- The diagnostic value of serum gastrokine 1 (GKN1) protein in gastric cancer.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastric cancer screening using endoscopy has recently spread in Eastern Asian countries showing increasing evidence of its effectiveness. However, despite the benefits of endoscopic screening for gastric cancer, its major harms include infection, complications, false-negative results, false-positive results, and overdiagnosis. The most serious harm of endoscopic screening is overdiagnosis and this can occur in any cancer screening programs. Overdiagnosis is defined as the detection of cancers that would never have been found if there is no cancer screening. Overdiagnosis has been estimated from randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and modeling. It can be calculated on the basis of a comparison of the incidence of cancer between screened and unscreened individuals after the follow-up. Although the estimation method for overdiagnosis has not yet been standardized, estimation of overdiagnosis is needed in endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. To minimize overdiagnosis, the target age group and screening interval should be appropriately defined. Moreover, the balance of benefits and harms must be carefully considered to effectively introduce endoscopic screening in communities. Further research regarding overdiagnosis is warranted when evaluating the effectiveness of endoscopic screening.
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.