ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2018
Discharge of patients with an acute upper gastrointestinal bleed from the emergency department using an extended Glasgow-Blatchford Score.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A unified prognostic tool for predicting critical outcomes in gastrointestinal bleeding.Medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating The Glasgow Blatchford Score for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk Stratification in A Community Hospital: A Retrospective Study.Spartan medical research journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation and treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients taking anticoagulants presenting to the emergency department.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Preclinical study of a novel ingestible bleeding sensor for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Pre-Endoscopic Scores Predicting Low-Risk Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Derivation and validation of a novel risk score to predict need for haemostatic intervention in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (London Haemostat Score).BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Article
- The Predictive Value of Glasgow-Blatchford Score: The Experience of an Emergency Department.Cureus · 2023Article
- Advancing care for acute gastrointestinal bleeding using artificial intelligence.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2021Article
- Glasgow-Blatchford Score Predicts Post-Discharge Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- The effectiveness of uric acid in determining prognosis in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and its comparison with risk scores.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo use an extended Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) cut-off of ≤1 to aid discharge of patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) from emergency departments.
backgroundThe GBS accurately predicts the need for intervention and death in AUGIB, and a cut-off of 0 is recommended to identify patients for discharge without endoscopy. However, this cut-off is limited by identifying a low percentage of low-risk patients. Extension of the cut-off to ≤1 or ≤2 has been proposed to increase this proportion, but there is controversy as to the optimal cut-off and little data on performance in routine clinical practice.
methodsDual-centre study in which patients with AUGIB and GBS ≤1 were discharged from the emergency department without endoscopy unless there was another reason for admission. Retrospective analysis of associated adverse outcome defined as a 30-day combined endpoint of blood transfusion, intervention or death.
results569 patients presented with AUGIB from 2015 to 2018. 146 (25.7%) had a GBS ≤1 (70, GBS=0; 76, GBS=1). Of these, 103 (70.5%) were managed as outpatients, and none had an adverse outcome. GBS ≤1 had a negative predictive value=100% and the GBS had an area under receiver operator characteristic (AUROC)=0.89 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.91) in predicting adverse outcomes. In 2008-2009, prior to risk scoring (n=432), 6.5% of patients presenting with AUGIB were discharged safely from the emergency department in comparison with 18.1% (p<0.001) in this cohort. A GBS cut-off ≤2 was associated with an adverse outcome in 8% of cases.
conclusionGBS of ≤1 is the optimal cut-off for the discharge of patients with an AUGIB from the emergency department.
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.