Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29670651›Full record

ReviewGastroenterology research and practice2018

The Comparison between Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Surgery in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Junbi Hu, Yan Zhao, Mudan Ren, Yarui Li, Xinlan Lu, Guifang Lu, Dan Zhang, Dake Chu, Shuixiang He

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. UEG Week 2019 Poster Presentations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

9 authors.

Junbi HuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Yan ZhaoDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Mudan RenDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Yarui LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Xinlan LuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Guifang LuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Dan ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Dake ChuDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.
Shuixiang HeDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3396-5653

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThere are two treatment modalities for early gastric cancer (EGC)-surgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of ESD with surgery.

methodThe article was performed by searching PubMed databases. Data were extracted using predefined form and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated and

results13 studies were identified. The incidence of perforation in two groups was different [OR = 6.18 (95% CI: 1.37-27.98),

conclusionESD appears to be preferable for EGC, due to a lower rate of adverse events, shorter hospital stay, cheaper cost, and higher QOL.

Identifiers

PMID29670651
PMCPMC5835246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.