ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2017
Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: Which one to use?
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- ISG Task Force on Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB)-Comparison of Risk Scores in Nonvariceal Bleeding-A Prospective Multicenter Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Characteristics, Risk Stratification, and Outcomes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- A Review of Risk Scores within Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Use of the AIMS65 and pre-endoscopy Rockall scores in the prediction of mortality in patients with the upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2022Article
- Article
- Nomogram for predicting rebleeding after initial endoscopic epinephrine injection monotherapy hemostasis in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: a retrospective cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Comparing the Performance of the ABC, AIMS65, GBS, and pRS Scores in Predicting 90-day Mortality Or Rebleeding Among Emergency Department Patients with Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Prospective Multicenter Study.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2021Article
- Comparison of Glasgow-Blatchford Score and Rockall Score in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2020Article
- Correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleedingTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2020Article
- British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)-led multisociety consensus care bundle for the early clinical management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Frontline gastroenterology · 2020Article
- [Treatment of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: endoluminal-endovascular-surgical].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2019Review
- Discharge of patients with an acute upper gastrointestinal bleed from the emergency department using an extended Glasgow-Blatchford Score.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2018Article
- The effect of the shock index and scoring systems for predicting mortality among geriatric patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective cohort study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicinaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS) and Baylor bleeding score (BBS) in predicting clinical outcomes and need for interventions in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.
methodsBetween January 2008 and December 2013, 1012 consecutive patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) were prospectively followed. The pre-endoscopic RS, BBS and GBS, as well as the post-endoscopic diagnostic scores (RS and BBS) were calculated for all patients according to their urgent upper endoscopy findings. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics (AUROC) curves were calculated for the prediction of lethal outcome, rebleeding, needs for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention, and the optimal cutoff values were evaluated.
resultsPUB accounted for 41.9% of all upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, 5.2% patients died and 5.4% patients underwent surgery. By comparing the AUROC curves of the aforementioned pre-endoscopic scores, the RS best predicted lethal outcome (AUROC 0.82
conclusionThe RS is the best predictor of mortality and the GBS is the best predictor of rebleeding, need for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention in patients with PUB. There is no one 'perfect score' and we suggest that these two tests be used concomitantly.
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.