Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30178283›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2018

A Survey of Expert Practice and Attitudes Regarding Advanced Imaging Modalities in Surveillance of Barrett's Esophagus.

Jorge D Machicado, Samuel Han, Rena H Yadlapati, Violette C Simon, Bashar J Qumseya, Shahnaz Sultan, Vladimir M Kushnir, Sri Komanduri, Amit Rastogi, V Raman Muthusamy and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Barrett's esophagus: current standards in advanced imaging.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021
    Review
  3. 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

16 authors.

Jorge D MachicadoUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Samuel HanUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Rena H YadlapatiUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Violette C SimonUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Bashar J QumseyaArchbold Medical Center, Thomasville, GA, USA.
Shahnaz SultanMinneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Vladimir M KushnirWashington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Sri KomanduriNorthwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Amit RastogiUniversity of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS, USA.
V Raman MuthusamyUniversity of California in Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Rehan HaidryUniversity College Hospital, London, UK.
Krish RagunathUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Rajvinder SinghUniversity of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Hazem T HammadUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Nicholas J ShaheenUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Sachin WaniUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Mail Stop F735, 1635 Aurora Court, Rm 2.031, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. sachinwani10@yahoo.com.

Funding

GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASE TRAINING GRANTT32DK007038 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI COLGAN, SEAN P · 1986 to 2020
$3.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublished guidelines do not address what the minimum incremental diagnostic yield (IDY) for detection of dysplasia/cancer is required over the standard Seattle protocol for an advanced imaging modality (AIM) to be implemented in routine surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients. We aimed to report expert practice patterns and attitudes, specifically addressing the minimum IDY in the use of AIMs in BE surveillance.

methodsAn international group of BE experts completed an anonymous electronic survey of domains relevant to surveillance practice patterns and use of AIMs. The evaluated AIMs were conventional chromoendoscopy (CC), virtual chromoendoscopy (VC), volumetric laser endomicroscopy (VLE), confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE), and wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS

resultsThe survey response rate was 84% (61/73)-41 US and 20 non-US. Experts were most comfortable with and routinely use VC and CC, and least comfortable with and rarely use VLE, CLE, and WATS

conclusionThese results should inform benchmarks that need to be met for guidelines to recommend the routine use of AIMs in the surveillance of BE patients.

Indexed as

Endoscopy, GastrointestinalAnalysis of VarianceBarrett EsophagusEsophagusGlobal HealthHealth Care SurveysHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Procedures and Techniques UtilizationAdvanced imaging modalitiesBarrett’s esophagusPractice patternsSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID30178283
PMCPMC6541486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.