ArticlePloS one2017
Prevalence of and risk for gastrointestinal bleeding and peptic ulcerative disorders in a cohort of HIV patients from a U.S. healthcare claims database.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Racial Disparities in People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Nationwide Study (2016-2021).Le infezioni in medicina · 2026Article
- Kaposi Sarcoma Presenting as Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in a Patient With Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome.Case reports in gastrointestinal medicine · 2025Article
- Symptom experience and perceived symptom manageability among people with HIV in China: a phenomenological study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Postoperative Bleeding in a HIV-Positive Patient Operated for Oral Cancer: A Case Report.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary study objectives were to estimate the frequencies and rates of gastrointestinal bleeding and peptic ulcerative disorder in HIV-positive patients compared with age- and sex-matched HIV-negative subjects. Data from a US insurance claims database was used for this analysis. Among 89,207 patients with HIV, 9.0% had a GI bleed, 1.0% had an upper gastrointestinal bleed, 5.6% had a lower gastrointestinal bleed, 1.9% had a peptic ulcerative disorder diagnosis, and 0.6% had both gastrointestinal/peptic ulcerative disorder. Among 267,615 HIV-negative subjects, the respective frequencies were 6.9%, 0.6%, 4.3%, 1.4%, and 0.4% (p<0.0001 for each diagnosis subcategory). After combining effect measure modifiers into comedication and comorbidity strata, gastrointestinal bleeding hazard ratios (HRs) were higher for HIV-positive patients without comedication/comorbidity, and those with comedication alone (HR, 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.62-2.84; HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.47-1.71). The rate of peptic ulcerative disorder among those without a history of ulcers and no comorbidity/comedication was also elevated (HR, 2.72; 95% CI, 2.48-2.99). Hazard ratios of gastrointestinal bleeding, and peptic ulcerative disorder without a history of ulcers were lower among patients infected with HIV with comedication/comorbidity (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56-0.73; HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.65). Rates of gastrointestinal bleeding plus peptic ulcerative disorder followed a similar pattern. In summary, the rates of gastrointestinal/peptic ulcerative disorder events comparing HIV-infected subjects to non-HIV-infected subjects were differential based on comorbidity and comedication status.
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.